Historically, structural material selection has been dependent on initial material cost. However, increasing pressure on the construction industry to examine projects' long-term financial and environmental effects is pushing a more holistic approach. As a result, materials with higher starting costs but lower expenses over the life cycle of a construction project are gaining popularity. In this study, the life cycle costs of structures made of two such metallic materials (stainless steel and carbon steel) were investigated. Two structural applications are studied: a typical office structure and a bridge. The initial material cost per ton ratio (stainless steel: carbon steel) was calculated to be 4.0:1.0. Following a preliminary structural design to current European design standards that took into account material densities and structural properties (strength and stiffness), it was discovered that carbon steel offers the most competitive solution for both the typical office structure and the bridge on an initial cost basis. However, when additional life cycle costs such as maintenance, end-of-life costs, and the residual value of the structure are taken into account (appropriately discounted to present values), the results show that carbon steel provides the most competitive life cycle solution for the typical office structure but the most expensive life cycle solution for the bridge. Overall, it is considered that stainless steel may offer more competitive options than carbon steel for bridges and exposed portions of building structures across their entire life cycle.