Time difference between Shanghai and Kiryat Gat
Kiryat Gat is 5 hours behind Shanghai.
Local time in both cities
Shanghai · China
16:40
Kiryat Gat · Israel
11:40
Kiryat Gat is 5 hours behind Shanghai.
same day
Time zones
| Shanghai | Asia/Shanghai · UTC+08:00 |
|---|---|
| Kiryat Gat | Asia/Jerusalem · UTC+03:00 |
Shanghai does not observe daylight saving and stays on UTC+08:00 all year.
Kiryat Gat is currently on daylight saving time (UTC+03:00). Next change: 2026-10-25 01:00.
Hour-by-hour conversion
Calculated for 2026-09-21 local time in Shanghai. The two places start and end daylight saving on different dates, so another day can give a different result.
| Shanghai (source) | Kiryat Gat (target) |
|---|---|
| 00:00 | 19:00 prev day |
| 01:00 | 20:00 prev day |
| 02:00 | 21:00 prev day |
| 03:00 | 22:00 prev day |
| 04:00 | 23:00 prev day |
| 05:00 | 00:00 |
| 06:00 | 01:00 |
| 07:00 | 02:00 |
| 08:00 | 03:00 |
| 09:00 | 04:00 |
| 10:00 | 05:00 |
| 11:00 | 06:00 |
| 12:00 | 07:00 |
| 13:00 | 08:00 |
| 14:00 | 09:00 |
| 15:00 | 10:00 |
| 16:00 | 11:00 |
| 17:00 | 12:00 |
| 18:00 | 13:00 |
| 19:00 | 14:00 |
| 20:00 | 15:00 |
| 21:00 | 16:00 |
| 22:00 | 17:00 |
| 23:00 | 18:00 |
Other common differences from Shanghai
FAQ
- How many hours apart are Shanghai and Kiryat Gat right now?
- The answer at the top of the page is calculated for the current moment and states which side is ahead. The gap changes during the year, because the two places usually start and end daylight saving on different dates.
- Is this difference the same all year?
- Not necessarily. Shanghai uses Asia/Shanghai and Kiryat Gat uses Asia/Jerusalem; if either observes daylight saving, the gap shifts during the year. Use “Convert a specific date and time” below to calculate it for a given day.
- How do I read the conversion table?
- The left column lists each whole hour in Shanghai; the right column is the local time in Kiryat Gat at that same instant, with date rollovers marked. On the day clocks jump forward, some hours do not exist locally — the table says so instead of showing a plausible but wrong value.