AXN480330S Equivalent & Substitute Parts

Part Overview

The AXN480330S is an 80-position rectangular connector header manufactured by Panasonic Electric Works, designed for surface mount applications with outer shroud contacts and gold plating. This component is classified as obsolete, making identification of functionally equivalent alternatives essential for ongoing production and maintenance applications. The part operates within the P8 series and is suitable for applications requiring high-density interconnection with board-guided mounting.

Substiute Parts

AXN480330S

Panasonic Electric WorksIn Stock: 912AXN480330S Datasheet

Current PartRFQ

FX8-80P-SV(91)

Hirose Electric Co., Ltd.In Stock: 1451FX8-80P-SV(91) Datasheet

SimilarRFQ

Key Parameters

Substitute Part Grouping Explanation

Substitution eligibility for the AXN480330S is determined by the following critical parameters:

• Connector Type: Header with outer shroud contacts (maintains mechanical and electrical interface compatibility)
• Number of Positions: 80 positions (ensures pin count compatibility)
• Number of Rows: 2 rows (maintains contact arrangement)
• Mounting Type: Surface mount (preserves PCB assembly process compatibility)
• Contact Finish: Gold (ensures electrical performance and corrosion resistance)
• Features: Board guide (maintains mechanical alignment and stability)

The substitute part FX8-80P-SV(91) from Hirose Electric Co., Ltd. meets these core substitution criteria. However, variations in pitch (0.024" vs. 0.031"), height above board (0.112" vs. 0.107"), and mated stacking heights must be evaluated within the context of specific application requirements and PCB layout constraints.

Parameter Comparison

Engineering Selection Recommendations

The FX8-80P-SV(91) is an active product from Hirose Electric Co., Ltd. and is ROHS3 compliant and REACH unaffected, providing regulatory compliance advantages over the obsolete AXN480330S. Both components share identical moisture sensitivity classification (MSL 1) and contact finish specifications.

Selection between these parts must account for pitch differences. The AXN480330S operates at 0.031" (0.80mm) pitch, while the FX8-80P-SV(91) operates at 0.024" (0.60mm) pitch. This difference affects PCB trace routing, contact spacing, and overall connector footprint. The height above board differential (0.107" vs. 0.112") and mated stacking height options must be evaluated against application clearance requirements and mating interface specifications.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Can the FX8-80P-SV(91) directly replace the AXN480330S without PCB redesign?

A: Direct replacement without PCB modification is not possible due to pitch differences (0.031" vs. 0.024"). PCB layout, trace routing, and connector footprint require redesign to accommodate the Hirose component.

Q: Are the mating interfaces compatible between these two connectors?

A: No. The pitch difference (0.80mm vs. 0.60mm) means mating connectors and receptacles are not interchangeable. Corresponding mating components must be sourced for the selected connector type.

Q: What is the significance of the different mated stacking heights?

A: Mated stacking heights define the distance between the connector header and its mating receptacle when fully engaged. The AXN480330S offers three options (3mm, 4.6mm, 6mm), while the FX8-80P-SV(91) provides only 3mm. Application requirements for connector separation and clearance must be evaluated against available stacking height options.

Q: How do the compliance certifications differ?

A: The FX8-80P-SV(91) carries active ROHS3 compliance and REACH unaffected status. The AXN480330S, being obsolete, may not meet current regulatory requirements for new designs or production environments subject to these standards.

Q: What is the practical impact of the 0.005" height difference above board?

A: The 0.005" (0.13mm) difference in height above board is minimal and typically does not impact application performance. However, in space-constrained applications with tight clearance specifications, this differential should be evaluated against mechanical design constraints.