Differences between stainless steel springs and carbon steel springs

First of all, the two materials differ in composition. The primary disadvantage of carbon steel springs is their susceptibility to rust, especially when used in high-temperature and high-humidity environments. Once rust forms, it corrodes the metal structure of the material, making it prone to deformation and fracture. Therefore, stainless steel springs should be prioritized for products operating in harsh service environments.

Secondly, the performance disparity between the two stems from distinct manufacturing processes. Carbon steel springs are produced by subjecting low-hardness base materials to quenching followed by tempering to achieve the high hardness required for springs. This manufacturing method results in low toughness and a short service life for carbon steel, and complete fracture of carbon steel springs often occurs during practical use. In contrast, stainless steel is processed by repeatedly rolling low-hardness base stock with rolling mills to attain the thickness and hardness needed for spring production, while also endowing the material with excellent toughness. Consequently, stainless steel springs boast a longer service life and more stable performance compared to carbon steel counterparts.

Lastly, there is a notable price gap between the two materials. Stainless steel contains 16% to 18% chromium and 6% to 8% nickel, making its cost two to three times higher than carbon steel. For springs of identical specifications with equal processing fees, the price difference between the two materials is approximately twofold.