turbo50
Well-Known Member
Boundary here.
Sponsored
Agreed :cheers:Let's be honest here - all of them are probably better than the poop in the car now.
Well looking at it from a materials stand point, I am not sure I could declare a winner. The first two numbers are the class of steel. 41 is straight chromoly and is pretty loose on the percentage chromium and molybdenum 93 is chromoly with some nickle in it, with more precise percentages of chromium and molybdenum. So that would explain the corrosion resistance. Here is were it gets interesting. The last two numbers refer to the percent carbon in the steel. The higher that percent usually the harder the steel is. So you have 4140 vs 9310. So the 4140 is probably hard, but that also comes with caviat of being less ductile. Kind of why we want to go away from powdered metal, but at a much higher thresh hold. 9310 has a known percentage of chromium and molybdenum along with nickle for corrosion resistance, and it has a lower carbon content making it less hard but more ductile. The question then becomes yield strength, which was posted above. So if it is ductile but has a high yeild strength it can retain its shape while allowing deformation instead of breaking. Both metals start to see material property changes in the 1000F-1100F range with 9310 having scuffing effects as the nickle distilates to the surface. Which hopefully is not anything close to being seen in a car engine. So that is my 2 cents. In the end they both will probably be just fine if kept in a good oil bath.