---
title: "What key properties of stainless steel 316 matter for injection mold core components?"
description: "When comparing mold suppliers and confused by 316 stainless steel tradeoffs between cost, corrosion resistance and service life, get clear actionable criteria to evaluate material fit, avoid overpaying for unnecessary grades, and reduce unplanned downtime for corrosive resin production."
url: "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html"
language: "en"
type: "Q&A"
category: "Injection Molding Q&A"
datePublished: "2026-09-26"
dateModified: "2026-09-26"
brand: "OK TOOL"
manufacturer: "OK TOOL"
answerCount: 10
---

# What key properties of stainless steel 316 matter for injection mold core components?

## Question

 I am currently evaluating 3 different injection mold suppliers for our new production line running food-grade PVC and glass-filled nylon 66 parts, and every supplier has brought up 316 stainless steel as a recommended material for the mold cavities and core pins, but their explanations of 316 properties are all over the place. One says 316 is non-magnetic so it will not attract fine metal debris that scratches part surfaces, another claims 316 will never rust even with 6 months of idle time between production runs, the third says we can save 30% on post-mold polishing if we use 316 instead of hardened P20. I am confused because we previously used regular 420 stainless steel for similar molds and had unexpected pitting after 120k cycles. I need to figure out which of these claims are real, what 316 properties actually apply to our specific mold use case, and where the tradeoffs are so I don’t end up paying 25% more for a material that doesn’t deliver the promised benefits, or pick a lower grade that causes unplanned downtime later. 

## Answers
                            
### Answer 1 — Best Answer

Most of the conflicting claims you received from suppliers come from mixing general 316 stainless steel material properties with application-specific performance under real injection molding conditions, rather than outright false statements. The core base properties of standard annealed 316 include 16-18.5% chromium, 10-14% nickel, and 2-3% molybdenum additions that are the main differentiator from 304 stainless steel, which gives it 30-40% higher pitting resistance equivalent number (PREN) and far better tolerance to chloride and acidic vapor from heated PVC and nylon 66 with flame retardant additives.

For your specific production scenario, the first supplier’s note on non-magnetic properties is partially correct: fully annealed 316 has very low magnetic permeability, but cold working or welding done during mold fabrication can introduce localized magnetism, so you will still need to implement standard debris filtering for your injection feed system. The second supplier’s claim of zero rust after 6 months idle is only true if you conduct full passivation after machining and store the mold in a temperature-controlled low-humidity environment, not if you leave residual PVC purge material on the cavity surfaces.

**The first decision criteria to apply is to calculate your expected total mold cycles first**. If your annual production volume is under 80k cycles, and you only run corrosive resins less than 30% of the time, standard 420 hardened stainless steel will deliver sufficient performance, and you do not need to upgrade to 316. If your cumulative cycle count exceeds 200k, and you will run food-grade PVC for more than half of your production time, 316 will reduce cavity pitting related rework by 60% and extend total mold life by 2x compared to 420.

**Ask every supplier to provide the mill test report (MTR) for their 316 steel stock before placing order, to confirm the molybdenum content is above 2.2% and the sulfur content is below 0.008%**. Higher sulfur free-machining 316 variants that are often used for general hardware parts have significantly lower corrosion resistance, and many unqualified suppliers use these lower cost grades for mold fabrication without notifying customers.

**Add a mandatory 48-hour salt spray test clause for the finished 316 mold component in your technical specification**, with no visible rust spots allowed after the test completes. This eliminates vague verbal claims about corrosion performance and gives you a clear acceptance standard before the mold enters mass production. For long term prevention, you can also cross reference the actual 316 performance data from your existing 420 mold failures, to confirm if pitting occurred on areas where PREN value below 25 would be the root cause, rather than improper cooling line maintenance.

**status:** accepted
**Author:** Linda Xu
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 2

For high volume production running 316 cavity molds, the thermal conductivity of standard 316 is roughly 15 W/m·K at 200°C, which is 15% lower than standard P20 tool steel. This means you will see a 6-8 second longer cycle time for thick wall parts if you use the original cooling layout designed for P20. Most teams miss this adjustment, leading to 10% lower output across 1 million annual cycles, which erases most of the mold maintenance cost savings from 316’s corrosion resistance.

You can offset this gap by adjusting coolant flow speed to maintain consistent mold surface temperature, and running a 500 cycle trial to confirm actual cycle time before full production ramp up. For fully automated cells that run 24/7 with minimal operator intervention, this small cycle time difference adds up to over 100 hours of lost production time per line per year if left unaddressed.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Emily Chen
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 3

The hardness of standard annealed 316 used for mold cavities tops out at around HRB 95-100, which is significantly softer than hardened 420 stainless steel that reaches HRC 48-52. This means if your parts contain 20% or higher glass fiber filler, the abrasive wear rate on 316 cavity surfaces will be 2x faster than on hardened 420, even with full passivation.

For parts with sharp fine details less than 0.5mm in thickness on the core side, you can expect the first 0.02mm wear mark to appear after roughly 80k cycles, compared to 180k cycles on properly hardened 420. You can address this by applying a thin PVD coating on the 316 surface after final polishing, which boosts abrasive wear resistance by 70% while retaining all of 316’s original corrosion resistance properties.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Rachel Huang
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 4

When machining 316 for precision mold components, the material’s higher nickel content creates longer, stringy chips that can wrap around cutting tools if the feed rate is set too low, leading to unexpected tool breakage and uneven surface finish. Most shops program 316 using the same parameters they use for regular 304 stainless, which leads to 30% longer machining time and 20% higher cutting tool wear.

A properly optimized 316 machining strategy uses 15% lower surface speed, 20% higher feed rate, and positive rake angle tools, which can deliver the same Ra 0.8 surface finish in half the cycle time, and reduce total machining cost by around 12% compared to unoptimized setups. This is the main reason you will see large price gaps between different suppliers offering 316 mold components.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Amy Li
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 5

When designing molds with 316 cavities, the lower yield strength of 316 compared to hardened tool steel means you need to increase the wall thickness of the mold core back plate by 15% to avoid deflection under high 1200 bar injection pressure. If you keep the original back plate thickness designed for P20, you may see 0.01-0.02mm cavity deflection on large flat part surfaces, leading to inconsistent part wall thickness and occasional flash on the parting line.

Gate location also needs to be adjusted slightly to reduce high shear points that can cause localized overheating of the resin, which eliminates the rare case where acidic melt sits on the 316 surface for extended periods and causes premature pitting near the gate vestige area. These small design adjustments almost never get mentioned in initial supplier quotations, so unoptimized 316 molds often run into unexpected quality issues after 30k cycles.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Michael Wu
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 6

When you use 316 for core pins and cavity inserts, the material’s coefficient of thermal expansion is roughly 17.2 x 10-6 /°C, which is 20% higher than standard carbon tool steel. This means when the mold reaches stable operating temperature of 80°C, the dimensional expansion of 316 inserts will be larger than the surrounding mold base that is made of regular S50C steel.

If you set the insert fit tolerance at ambient temperature to zero interference, you will see the inserts press against each other when the mold heats up, leading to unnecessary wear on the parting line and increased mold opening force. Adjusting the insert fit to a 0.005mm clearance at room temperature compensates for this thermal expansion difference, and eliminates fit issues that would otherwise cause inconsistent assembly of your final plastic parts across long production runs.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Kevin Liu
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 7

When scheduling 316 mold fabrication, add 2 extra days to your project timeline for the post-machining passivation process, which is not required for standard carbon steel molds. Many suppliers skip the full 24-hour passivation bath and only do a quick wipe with passivation paste to save time, which leaves microscopic iron contamination on the machined surface that leads to rust spots appearing within the first 2 weeks of production.

Add a passivation validation step at your incoming quality checkpoint after rough machining, before the supplier proceeds to final polishing. This avoids the scenario where you sign off on sample parts that look perfect, but the first 10k production parts come out with fine rust stains on the surface that require secondary manual cleaning.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** David Zhang
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 8

For production lines that previously used non-316 molds for corrosive resins, switching to properly processed 316 can reduce part reject rates related to surface pitting marks from 2.7% to under 0.3% across 200k cycles. Most teams do not track this specific reject category separately, so they underestimate the total cost savings of 316 material by more than 50%.

You can calculate the exact break even point for the 25% higher upfront mold cost by multiplying your annual part output by your current surface defect reject rate, then adding the cost of mold rework downtime that usually takes 8-12 hours per occurrence to re-polish pitted cavities. For most production scenarios running more than 120k parts per year, the break even point for 316 falls at around 7 months of continuous production, which is far faster than most procurement teams estimate when only looking at initial tooling cost.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Eric Zhao
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 9

For parts that are used in outdoor coastal environments or wash down with chlorine-based sanitizers, the 316 mold’s lower surface iron contamination risk also reduces the chance of trace iron leaching onto the plastic part surface. This is a critical unstated benefit for food contact and medical device components, where even tiny amounts of iron residue left on the part surface can lead to accelerated discoloration of the final product during field use.

If your end customer requires 3+ years of outdoor service life for the finished plastic parts, using 316 for mold cavities will ensure consistent part surface quality across the entire production run, so no late batches of parts have hidden iron contamination that leads to premature product failure in the field. You can validate this by doing an iron residue test on the first 50 parts produced from the new mold.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Sophia Wang
**Date:** 2026-09-26

### Answer 10

Not all 316 stainless steel stock is equal, and there are 3 common commercial grades in the market in 2026 that have very different cost and performance profiles. Standard 316L low carbon grade has maximum 0.03% carbon content, which avoids intergranular corrosion after welding, and is the most suitable grade for long service life molds. The cheaper standard 316 grade with 0.08% maximum carbon content costs 8% less, but will develop micro corrosion cracks along weld lines after 6 months of intermittent production.

The free machining 316F grade with added sulfur costs 12% less than 316L, but its PREN value drops to under 24, which makes its corrosion performance barely better than 304 stainless steel. For your mold application, the small 8% extra cost for 316L grade delivers double the service life, which is the clear optimal cost performance choice, and there is no practical reason to select the other two lower grade variants for this use case.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Jason Zhou
**Date:** 2026-09-26

## Related Resources

- [Injection Molding Q&A](https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/injection-molding/)
- [Plastic Injection Molding](https://www.ok-tool.com/capabilities/plastic-injection-molding/)
- [Injection Molding Guide](https://www.ok-tool.com/manufacturing/injection-molding/)
- [Injection Molding Buying Guides](https://www.ok-tool.com/buying/injection-molding/)
- [Products](https://www.ok-tool.com/products/)
- [Custom Manufacturing](https://www.ok-tool.com/custom-manufacturing/)
- [Manufacturing Knowledge Base](https://www.ok-tool.com/knowledge/)
- [Injection Molding](https://www.ok-tool.com/knowledge/injection-molding/)

## Structured Data

```json
[
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "QAPage",
      "mainEntity": {
        "@type": "Question",
        "name": "What key properties of stainless steel 316 matter for injection mold core components?",
        "text": "I am currently evaluating 3 different injection mold suppliers for our new production line running food-grade PVC and glass-filled nylon 66 parts, and every supplier has brought up 316 stainless steel as a recommended material for the mold cavities and core pins, but their explanations of 316 properties are all over the place. One says 316 is non-magnetic so it will not attract fine metal debris that scratches part surfaces, another claims 316 will never rust even with 6 months of idle time between production runs, the third says we can save 30% on post-mold polishing if we use 316 instead of hardened P20. I am confused because we previously used regular 420 stainless steel for similar molds and had unexpected pitting after 120k cycles. I need to figure out which of these claims are real, what 316 properties actually apply to our specific mold use case, and where the tradeoffs are so I don’t end up paying 25% more for a material that doesn’t deliver the promised benefits, or pick a lower grade that causes unplanned downtime later.",
        "answerCount": 10,
        "upvoteCount": 6,
        "datePublished": "2026-09-26T12:43:44Z",
        "dateModified": "2026-09-26T12:52:03Z",
        "author": {
          "@type": "Person",
          "name": "Anonymous",
          "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html"
        }
                ,"acceptedAnswer": {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Most of the conflicting claims you received from suppliers come from mixing general 316 stainless steel material properties with application-specific performance under real injection molding conditions, rather than outright false statements. The core base properties of standard annealed 316 include 16-18.5% chromium, 10-14% nickel, and 2-3% molybdenum additions that are the main differentiator from 304 stainless steel, which gives it 30-40% higher pitting resistance equivalent number (PREN) and far better tolerance to chloride and acidic vapor from heated PVC and nylon 66 with flame retardant additives. For your specific production scenario, the first supplier’s note on non-magnetic properties is partially correct: fully annealed 316 has very low magnetic permeability, but cold working or welding done during mold fabrication can introduce localized magnetism, so you will still need to implement standard debris filtering for your injection feed system. The second supplier’s claim of zero rust after 6 months idle is only true if you conduct full passivation after machining and store the mold in a temperature-controlled low-humidity environment, not if you leave residual PVC purge material on the cavity surfaces. The first decision criteria to apply is to calculate your expected total mold cycles first . If your annual production volume is under 80k cycles, and you only run corrosive resins less than 30% of the time, standard 420 hardened stainless steel will deliver sufficient performance, and you do not need to upgrade to 316. If your cumulative cycle count exceeds 200k, and you will run food-grade PVC for more than half of your production time, 316 will reduce cavity pitting related rework by 60% and extend total mold life by 2x compared to 420. Ask every supplier to provide the mill test report (MTR) for their 316 steel stock before placing order, to confirm the molybdenum content is above 2.2% and the sulfur content is below 0.008% . Higher sulfur free-machining 316 variants that are often used for general hardware parts have significantly lower corrosion resistance, and many unqualified suppliers use these lower cost grades for mold fabrication without notifying customers. Add a mandatory 48-hour salt spray test clause for the finished 316 mold component in your technical specification , with no visible rust spots allowed after the test completes. This eliminates vague verbal claims about corrosion performance and gives you a clear acceptance standard before the mold enters mass production. For long term prevention, you can also cross reference the actual 316 performance data from your existing 420 mold failures, to confirm if pitting occurred on areas where PREN value below 25 would be the root cause, rather than improper cooling line maintenance.",
            "upvoteCount": 6,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#acceptedAnswer",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:38:44Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Linda Xu","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/linda.html"}        }
                ,"suggestedAnswer": [
                  {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "For high volume production running 316 cavity molds, the thermal conductivity of standard 316 is roughly 15 W/m·K at 200°C, which is 15% lower than standard P20 tool steel. This means you will see a 6-8 second longer cycle time for thick wall parts if you use the original cooling layout designed for P20. Most teams miss this adjustment, leading to 10% lower output across 1 million annual cycles, which erases most of the mold maintenance cost savings from 316’s corrosion resistance. You can offset this gap by adjusting coolant flow speed to maintain consistent mold surface temperature, and running a 500 cycle trial to confirm actual cycle time before full production ramp up. For fully automated cells that run 24/7 with minimal operator intervention, this small cycle time difference adds up to over 100 hours of lost production time per line per year if left unaddressed.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-2",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:27:02Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Emily Chen","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/emily.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "The hardness of standard annealed 316 used for mold cavities tops out at around HRB 95-100, which is significantly softer than hardened 420 stainless steel that reaches HRC 48-52. This means if your parts contain 20% or higher glass fiber filler, the abrasive wear rate on 316 cavity surfaces will be 2x faster than on hardened 420, even with full passivation. For parts with sharp fine details less than 0.5mm in thickness on the core side, you can expect the first 0.02mm wear mark to appear after roughly 80k cycles, compared to 180k cycles on properly hardened 420. You can address this by applying a thin PVD coating on the 316 surface after final polishing, which boosts abrasive wear resistance by 70% while retaining all of 316’s original corrosion resistance properties.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-3",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:25:47Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Rachel Huang","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/rachel.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When machining 316 for precision mold components, the material’s higher nickel content creates longer, stringy chips that can wrap around cutting tools if the feed rate is set too low, leading to unexpected tool breakage and uneven surface finish. Most shops program 316 using the same parameters they use for regular 304 stainless, which leads to 30% longer machining time and 20% higher cutting tool wear. A properly optimized 316 machining strategy uses 15% lower surface speed, 20% higher feed rate, and positive rake angle tools, which can deliver the same Ra 0.8 surface finish in half the cycle time, and reduce total machining cost by around 12% compared to unoptimized setups. This is the main reason you will see large price gaps between different suppliers offering 316 mold components.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-4",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:24:14Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Amy Li","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/amy.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When designing molds with 316 cavities, the lower yield strength of 316 compared to hardened tool steel means you need to increase the wall thickness of the mold core back plate by 15% to avoid deflection under high 1200 bar injection pressure. If you keep the original back plate thickness designed for P20, you may see 0.01-0.02mm cavity deflection on large flat part surfaces, leading to inconsistent part wall thickness and occasional flash on the parting line. Gate location also needs to be adjusted slightly to reduce high shear points that can cause localized overheating of the resin, which eliminates the rare case where acidic melt sits on the 316 surface for extended periods and causes premature pitting near the gate vestige area. These small design adjustments almost never get mentioned in initial supplier quotations, so unoptimized 316 molds often run into unexpected quality issues after 30k cycles.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-5",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:14:07Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Michael Wu","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/michael.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When you use 316 for core pins and cavity inserts, the material’s coefficient of thermal expansion is roughly 17.2 x 10-6 /°C, which is 20% higher than standard carbon tool steel. This means when the mold reaches stable operating temperature of 80°C, the dimensional expansion of 316 inserts will be larger than the surrounding mold base that is made of regular S50C steel. If you set the insert fit tolerance at ambient temperature to zero interference, you will see the inserts press against each other when the mold heats up, leading to unnecessary wear on the parting line and increased mold opening force. Adjusting the insert fit to a 0.005mm clearance at room temperature compensates for this thermal expansion difference, and eliminates fit issues that would otherwise cause inconsistent assembly of your final plastic parts across long production runs.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-6",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:10:38Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Kevin Liu","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/kevin.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "When scheduling 316 mold fabrication, add 2 extra days to your project timeline for the post-machining passivation process, which is not required for standard carbon steel molds. Many suppliers skip the full 24-hour passivation bath and only do a quick wipe with passivation paste to save time, which leaves microscopic iron contamination on the machined surface that leads to rust spots appearing within the first 2 weeks of production. Add a passivation validation step at your incoming quality checkpoint after rough machining, before the supplier proceeds to final polishing. This avoids the scenario where you sign off on sample parts that look perfect, but the first 10k production parts come out with fine rust stains on the surface that require secondary manual cleaning.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-7",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:07:39Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "David Zhang","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/david.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "For production lines that previously used non-316 molds for corrosive resins, switching to properly processed 316 can reduce part reject rates related to surface pitting marks from 2.7% to under 0.3% across 200k cycles. Most teams do not track this specific reject category separately, so they underestimate the total cost savings of 316 material by more than 50%. You can calculate the exact break even point for the 25% higher upfront mold cost by multiplying your annual part output by your current surface defect reject rate, then adding the cost of mold rework downtime that usually takes 8-12 hours per occurrence to re-polish pitted cavities. For most production scenarios running more than 120k parts per year, the break even point for 316 falls at around 7 months of continuous production, which is far faster than most procurement teams estimate when only looking at initial tooling cost.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-8",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T13:04:25Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Eric Zhao","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/eric.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "For parts that are used in outdoor coastal environments or wash down with chlorine-based sanitizers, the 316 mold’s lower surface iron contamination risk also reduces the chance of trace iron leaching onto the plastic part surface. This is a critical unstated benefit for food contact and medical device components, where even tiny amounts of iron residue left on the part surface can lead to accelerated discoloration of the final product during field use. If your end customer requires 3+ years of outdoor service life for the finished plastic parts, using 316 for mold cavities will ensure consistent part surface quality across the entire production run, so no late batches of parts have hidden iron contamination that leads to premature product failure in the field. You can validate this by doing an iron residue test on the first 50 parts produced from the new mold.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-9",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T12:52:21Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Sophia Wang","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/sophia.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Not all 316 stainless steel stock is equal, and there are 3 common commercial grades in the market in 2026 that have very different cost and performance profiles. Standard 316L low carbon grade has maximum 0.03% carbon content, which avoids intergranular corrosion after welding, and is the most suitable grade for long service life molds. The cheaper standard 316 grade with 0.08% maximum carbon content costs 8% less, but will develop micro corrosion cracks along weld lines after 6 months of intermittent production. The free machining 316F grade with added sulfur costs 12% less than 316L, but its PREN value drops to under 24, which makes its corrosion performance barely better than 304 stainless steel. For your mold application, the small 8% extra cost for 316L grade delivers double the service life, which is the clear optimal cost performance choice, and there is no practical reason to select the other two lower grade variants for this use case.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/key-properties-stainless-steel-316-injection-mold-core-components.html#suggestedAnswer-10",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-26T12:52:03Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Jason Zhou","url": "https://www.ok-tool.com/team/jason.html"}          }
                  ]
              }
    },
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
      "itemListElement": [
          {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Home", "item": "https://www.ok-tool.com/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Q&A", "item": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Injection Molding Q&A >", "item": "https://www.ok-tool.com/qa/injection-molding/<small>></small>"}          ,{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 4, "name": "What key properties of stainless steel 316 matter for injection mold core components?"}
      ]
    }
]
```