Hardness Testers

  • 5.1K Views
  • Last Post 17 May 2013
Revolverman posted this 27 February 2013

Anybody got experience with the LBT tester? Any preference for this or the Lee? Thanks

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
rockquarry posted this 27 February 2013

I have used the LBT tester for at least twenty years with no complaints. It seems to work very well, but I have nothing to compare it to. I know nothing about the Lee.

Attached Files

pat i. posted this 27 February 2013

I use one and have no complaints

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 27 February 2013

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=7215>Revolverman:

They both work very well! It is just a matter of personal preference. One or the other will have features more appealing to you. Get what you want.

I prefer the Lee. I like the way it works with my loading press on bullets or ingots. You may prefer the portability of the LBT not needing a loading press for operation. It is just a choice.

Gary

Attached Files

Chargar posted this 27 February 2013

I have used a SAECO for 25 years and it has been all I have needed. They do have their own hardness scale, but their numbers are easy to convert via a chart to Bhn.

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 07 March 2013

I've used an LBT tester for many years--sometime in the early 1980's, and have never felt the need to try another. Others may work well, but this one sits easily on a shelf over my loading bench, and is easy to grab and get a reading--usually under a minute. I'd buy another if this one ever went South. Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

mike morrison posted this 08 March 2013

my first tester was a saeco. still have it. bought a cabine tree and would sell the saeco if anyone is intersted. m

Attached Files

rmrix posted this 23 March 2013

I have the LBT. I ordered mine when it was first available some time in the '80's. Friends and I have compared their testers, Seaco, Lee and Cabintree with my LBT. We have done this in the same room on the same test samples. All can be made to work. As stated, you may have preference for one or another.

I will stick with the LBT for its ease of use, direct read out, and more than enough resolution (accuracy) to be useful and repeatable for cast bullet loading.   

LBT, as would be expected, gives great service. Once, in a fit of carelessness, I knocked the tester off the work table and onto the shop floor. The impact was enough to drastically change the calibration. Rather than having to buy a new one or return mine for repair, Mr. Smith was kind enough to phone me and walk me through the repair process at home. I got the unit back up and running in no time and later double checked the units accuracy by recasting some known lead samples I keep from certified alloy. Pure lead, Pb-Sn w/ratio of 40-1, 30-1, 25-1, 20-1 and 16-1 as well as old time clip on WW and Lino were used. I was happy with the readings. They agreed (again) closely with what has been written in various source text.  

Hardness testers can be a real aid in working out an accurate load.

You can't ask for more then that.

I hope this helps, Michael Rix

Attached Files

CB posted this 24 March 2013

I have the LBT as well. Others have summed it up really well, and I couldn't put it any better. I did have a SAECO, but wasn't truly happy with it because it only allows you to check bullets that have specific base dimensions. If that all you need, then it would be perfect, but I experiment a lot with different calibers, and I grew a bit tired of it after a while.

Attached Files

frnkeore posted this 27 March 2013

I've never owned a store bought hardness tester. What I use is a steel ball (can be any size from 1/4 to 3/4")and a known ingot of pure lead (hardness of 5 BHN) about the size of the test sample.

You just press the ball between what you want to test and the known pure lead sample and run this formula. I use a arbor press but, you can do it in a loading press. No certain pressure need just so both imprint.

5 x the product of the lead imprint dia, divided by sample dia, squared = the samples BHN

I have no way of drawing the equation, it might be more understandable that way.

Frank

Attached Files

LWesthoff posted this 27 March 2013

That's the method I use, too. I use lead and alloy samples cast in an aluminum muffin pan, and squeeze 'em together with a regular bench vise. The bottom of the “muffins” give you a nice flat surface for the ball bearing imprints. Needless to say, the bigger the steel ball bearing, the easier it is to measure comparative diameters.

Works real well.

Wes

Attached Files

Pigslayer posted this 29 March 2013

frnkeore wrote: I've never owned a store bought hardness tester. What I use is a steel ball (can be any size from 1/4 to 3/4")and a known ingot of pure lead (hardness of 5 BHN) about the size of the test sample.

You just press the ball between what you want to test and the known pure lead sample and run this formula. I use a arbor press but, you can do it in a loading press. No certain pressure need just so both imprint.

5 x the product of the lead imprint dia, divided by sample dia, squared = the samples BHN

I have no way of drawing the equation, it might be more understandable that way.

Frank

I'll have to try that!

If someone else had of done to me what I did to myself . . . I'd have killed him. Humility is an asset. Heh - heh.

Attached Files

parkerhale1200 posted this 16 April 2013

sorry, lbt lover, no lee or seaco

Attached Files

Pigslayer posted this 12 May 2013

Finally got around to securing some 5/16” diameter ball bearings. $5.00 @McMaster-Carr. Cheaper than a hardness tester of any make & readily available.

If someone else had of done to me what I did to myself . . . I'd have killed him. Humility is an asset. Heh - heh.

Attached Files

Uncle Russ posted this 12 May 2013

And when you are done you can shoot 'em at starlings with your sling shot. :wow:

Keep it light Buddy! :dance

Attached Files

Pigslayer posted this 12 May 2013

Uncle Russ wrote: And when you are done you can shoot 'em at starlings with your sling shot. :wow:

Keep it light Buddy! :dance

Never thought of that! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm . . .:dude:

If someone else had of done to me what I did to myself . . . I'd have killed him. Humility is an asset. Heh - heh.

Attached Files

vmwilson posted this 13 May 2013

I've used that ball bearing method in the past.  We had a character at work known as “Drifty” that also liked to shoot.  So one day I asked him where a guy could buy a big ball bearing.  He promptly reached in his pocket and handed me one that was about an inch or so in diameter.  Now what were the odds of that!

 

Mike

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 13 May 2013

I first bought a Saeco tester and was unhappy with it. It was not direct reading (needed a conversion table to use). It required a sample be cast (some bullets worked) to operate.

The LBT came along and works splendidly. It's accurate and direct reading. I have had it for many, many years.

I have no qualifications - it just works, easily and well.

Dale53

Attached Files

Pigslayer posted this 14 May 2013

frnkeore wrote: I've never owned a store bought hardness tester. What I use is a steel ball (can be any size from 1/4 to 3/4")and a known ingot of pure lead (hardness of 5 BHN) about the size of the test sample.

You just press the ball between what you want to test and the known pure lead sample and run this formula. I use a arbor press but, you can do it in a loading press. No certain pressure need just so both imprint.

5 x the product of the lead imprint dia, divided by sample dia, squared = the samples BHN

I have no way of drawing the equation, it might be more understandable that way.

Frank

Got home tonight & my 5/16” ball bearings were in the mailbox. Went to my shop & tested my ingots. When mixing my alloy I was shooting for a BHN of 15. My alloy tested at 15.9. Not bad. What an incredibly easy & simple way of testing ones lead. And it cost me all of $5.00 for the bearings + a few bucks in postage! Lead imprint dia. : .236 Sample dia. : .132 .236 divided by .132 = 1.787 1.787 x 1.787 = 3.194 3.194 x 5 = 15.97 BHN

Pretty Cool!

:dude::dude:

If someone else had of done to me what I did to myself . . . I'd have killed him. Humility is an asset. Heh - heh.

Attached Files

PETE posted this 14 May 2013

Pig,

I would think that the imprint on the lower pictured sample is pushing out the side and would give a false reading. Might be better to get an impression that's fully inside the sample.

My vote is for the LBT. Costs more than a ball bearing, which I've used, but no fuss no bother. Use it and read the results directly off the scale. No math which I'm not good at anyway. :)

Pete

Attached Files

Pigslayer posted this 14 May 2013

PETE wrote: Pig,

I would think that the imprint on the lower pictured sample is pushing out the side and would give a false reading. Might be better to get an impression that's fully inside the sample.

My vote is for the LBT. Costs more than a ball bearing, which I've used, but no fuss no bother. Use it and read the results directly off the scale. No math which I'm not good at anyway. :)

Pete

Splitting hairs? I think I'm pretty close. If anything I'm on the heavy side of the BHN.

If someone else had of done to me what I did to myself . . . I'd have killed him. Humility is an asset. Heh - heh.

Attached Files

Show More Posts
Close