lead hardness tester

  • 14K Views
  • Last Post 25 August 2009
Derek posted this 05 December 2006

Well, after many years of casting, I would like to upgrade from my thumbnail to a commercial hardness tester.  Anyone have advice (pro or con) regarding the 3 common ones, LBT, Lee, and Saeco?  Are there other testers out there?  thanks.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
303PV posted this 25 August 2009

I use a Lee.The problem with the Lee is holding the scope steady. It was very hard for me to read the scale. On the Cast Boolit website there was a simple way of solving this. I have simply copied that idea. The angled cut-off takes away light therefore I cut the tube straight. The modified microscope is the plastic children's version you can easily and cheaply buy on ebay. The one I bought was very easy to modify .I removed the optics and the Lee scope fits. It's kept in place with an O-ring.

PV

Attached Files

CB posted this 24 August 2009

applejack wrote:   The Saeco is well built but it's hard for me to hold the bullet in alignment thru that small slot until the point pierces the bullet and holds it for measuring.  Hold the thing straight up and down and the bullet just sits there by itself.

Attached Files

applejack posted this 24 August 2009

I've been using a saeco and it's sorta a pain to use. Younger guys with smaller fingers would work better.   I've got it borrowed from a friend that doesn't cast.  The Lee would definately be more agravating.  I'm planning on a LBT for my own as it is direct reading.  No charts need to convert from and to.  Cheaper also.  The Saeco is well built but it's hard for me to hold the bullet in alignment thru that small slot until the point pierces the bullet and holds it for measuring. 

Attached Files

1Shirt posted this 14 August 2009

I have a cabin tree, and think it is about the best deal since sliced white bread and dry toilet paper! 1Shirt!

Attached Files

1Shirt posted this 14 August 2009

I have a cabin tree, and think it is about the best deal since sliced white bread and dry toilet paper! 1Shirt!

Attached Files

gussy posted this 14 July 2009

You can look at a tester comparison test at:

www.lasc.us/Shay-BHN-Tester-Experiment.htm

Attached Files

mrbill2 posted this 14 July 2009

454PB wrote: Ed Harris wrote: I use a hardness tester made by Tioga Engineering which fits into my reloading press. It uses a calibrated spring and 10mm ball to apply a load to the sample and you read the diameter of the indent using a 10x magnifier with a calibrated vernier eyepiece, then take the BHN from a tarrage table.

This is also the method the Lee tester uses. I found it to be accurate after using it for a while and figuring a way to steady the microscope.

This helps with the Lee microscope. I use a flashlight for a light sores. Let the bullet sit and move the scope and stand to line things up.

Mr. Bill2

 

mrbill2

Attached Files

Duane Mellenbruch posted this 14 July 2009

At one time, Bill Ferguson, the antimony man, offered pure samples of  lead, Lyman #2 and linotype.  These are used to verify the hardness tester readings.  If these sets are still available, then you can verify the readings of the two testers at your convenience.  Duane

Attached Files

JDNC posted this 27 April 2009

I've got a question for all in ref to the Lee tool. For those who have used it.. do you find that the angled cut-off at the end of the micro-scope is on the wrong side for light. The only complaint I have is I can't seem to ever have any light to see. I wonder if one could drill a 1/4” hole on the opposite side of the angle to let light through?

I also have a LBT tester and find it faster to use but generally when it reads 20-22 Bhn the Lee reads about 30. I've tried everything but still get this diff in readings. But the $65K question is which one to believe?

Attached Files

RANGERRICK posted this 16 December 2006

500bfrman wrote: Another one to look at is cabin tree.  http://www.castingstuff.com>http://www.castingstuff.com

I think that is the right website.  I don't have any of the mentioned ones, or unmentioned for that matter.  But, would like to see what the experts have to say.  I have always liked the looks of cabin tree, and LBT.  I have one of Cabin Trees Combo Lead tester .

I have have to say it is just great to say the least .

It works on bullets , pig lead whatever you can get into the test area .

I have had a Saeco tester but after I got cabin tree's tester it just sat on my shelf , it's sold .

I also like that I can test loaded rounds ETC.

 

RR

 

Attached Files

454PB posted this 13 December 2006

Ed Harris wrote: I use a hardness tester made by Tioga Engineering which fits into my reloading press. It uses a calibrated spring and 10mm ball to apply a load to the sample and you read the diameter of the indent using a 10x magnifier with a calibrated vernier eyepiece, then take the BHN from a tarrage table.

This is also the method the Lee tester uses. I found it to be accurate after using it for a while and figuring a way to steady the microscope.

Attached Files

BABore posted this 12 December 2006

Ed Harris wrote: I use a hardness tester made by Tioga Engineering which fits into my reloading press. It uses a calibrated spring and 10mm ball to apply a load to the sample and you read the diameter of the indent using a 10x magnifier with a calibrated vernier eyepiece, then take the BHN from a tarrage table.

Sounds very similar to one I designed up a few years ago. Dan, at Mnt. Molds, posted a thread on one I sent him.

http://www.mountainmolds.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=162>http://www.mountainmolds.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=162

I used a digital load cell to calibrate the die spring and witness mark for a 200 lb load with 3/8 dia penetrator ball.

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 12 December 2006

I use a hardness tester made by Tioga Engineering which fits into my reloading press. It uses a calibrated spring and 10mm ball to apply a load to the sample and you read the diameter of the indent using a 10x magnifier with a calibrated vernier eyepiece, then take the BHN from a tarrage table.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

steveb posted this 08 December 2006

I think the Lee is hard to beat for the price. It takes a little getting used to as all the movements are backwards while looking through the scope. In a short while you get used to it though. IMO it works great.

Attached Files

JeffinNZ posted this 07 December 2006

Now what we REALLY need is a dial that attaches to a thumb nail!!! 

Huh, Huh?

I have ordered Lee as I am purely working on guessing right now.

cheers

Jeff

Cheers from New Zealand

Attached Files

pistolfan posted this 07 December 2006

I use the LBT and am most pleased with it. It is easy to use, no set up really, easy to read and not real $$$$. But like Jeff said it all depends on the user my reading of a bullet might be a little different than your's. In the long run if you cast and test a bullet one day but don't load that bullet for several months the hardness will be different. The best I think we can hope is to just be in the ballpark of a desired hardness range. Peter aka pistolfan   

Attached Files

CB posted this 06 December 2006

However with all for these results, there are a couple of factors that can cause the wide variance in reported results. I am not going to defend or dispel any one product.

Factor #1 - The ability of the user to correctly apply and maintain the 'same' pressure for the alloted time. There is no way a person can judge this without thousands of dollars of accurate calibrated lab grade load cells to know what level of pressure is being applied and maintained.

Factor #2 - The ability of the user to correctly read the indent (in the case of the Lee, Cabin Tree and Saeco) with the given instrument, which is a crude microscope with a scale imprinted on the lens. Again only lab quality equipment will give an accurate 'certified' reading.

My entire point is these tools are used as guides, not precision instruments. They will get you in the ball park. Your readings may differ from another persons because there are inherent inaccuracies due to the human factor.

It all comes down to what you are most comfortable with. I have used LBT, Saeco and Lee. All work well and do what they are intended to do for the price. In my opinion the LBT is easiest to use, but you can only test a smaller piece of alloy, like a bullet cut in half or a small ingot about 1/2 to 3/4” thick. With the Lee and for sure the Cabin Tree you can test larger ingots. The Lee requires patience to line up the microscope to measure the indent, there is no rushing this. I feel all of the readings I have obtained are accurate enough to get me in the ball park. I know if I have linotype, monotype or something softer. I only have thre categories of lead to cast bullets Hard - 18 to 24 bhn Harder - 25bhn and up Pistol and hunting bullets - under 14bhn

I cast them and send them down range and they all end up in the same place, the backstop.

Attached Files

JeffinNZ posted this 06 December 2006

http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm>http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm

Scroll down for a review.  Tests conducted by 15 individuals.

 

cheers

Jeff

Cheers from New Zealand

Attached Files

CB posted this 05 December 2006

I have the LBT and the Saeco and of the two I like the LBT much better.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 05 December 2006

I have a SAECO that I have had problems with. It is calibrated with how much compression is placed upon the internal spring. As the spring ages, it looses tension and can give errors unless checked against know alloys. I had to create a complete new chart to get readings. Ric

Attached Files

Show More Posts
Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close