LBT bullet hardness tester initial review

[6bg6ga]

Apparently you did nit read the article very well.

1.It was real world testing in a group of typical users.
The goal was to test using real bullets all cast from the same metal in the same casting run.

2. The same bullets were tested using a metallurgical lab machine that was calibrated to the NIST.

It was an excellent test and gave a much better statistical comparison than your very limited attempt at comparison..

Your opinion certainly not mine. #1. says all that needs to said as far as I am concerned. typical users without any experience thus so many variations and certainly not a good test but if it makes you feel good then so be it.

[EDG]

Everyone of those users were bullet casters just exactly like a cross section of the castboolits population.
The effect of the user has to be considered just like any other variable.
I think you are unhappy that your preferred tester did not fare so well.
That is what happens when a larger sample size is used. One guy can't fudge the results to prove he is right.

Your opinion certainly not mine. #1. says all that needs to said as far as I am concerned. typical users without any experience thus so many variations and certainly not a good test but if it makes you feel good then so be it.

[kevin c]

I have a LBT. As the LASC article commented, some of the testers seemed out of calibration and that was the case with mine.

I'd tested my new unit using known alloys and got consistent but much higher than expected numbers. My casting mentor who'd suggested the LBT then tested the same specimens on his own unit and got consistent but lower numbers in the range expected.

Veral himself replied to my emails with an explanation on how to adjust the tester and now it is dead on and consistent.

I used "consistent" a lot there. Per the LASC article, that is really what matters to the user.

I am satisfied with my LBT, but will say that I wish that it had come calibrated when shipped to me. I should also say that I don't use it much any more, since I can bear the expense (a pound of lead and shipping, which for multiple samples in a SFRB is about a buck fifty per test) to have BNE analyze my alloys.

[Traffer]

A lot of preferences here. Which is good. Healthy discussion is good. Did any of you pay less than $10 for your tester...NEW? Me, I did, took a while to learn how to use but for me ...and my budget...Pencil test is plenty good.

[largom]

I have had a Saeco, a LBT, and a LEE. I did my own, unscientific, tests of all 3 testers using the same alloy. The Saeco gave eradic results, the LBT and LEE agreed with each other most of the time. I did modify the LEE when I purchased it about 7 years ago. I mounted the scope into a kids microscope which made it steady and easy to focus. I also mounted a dial indicator to the top of the indenter unit. This assures me that the indenter spring is compressed exactly the same each time. I have since sold the Saeco and LBT testers. I am confident the LEE does what I need it to do.

Larry

[EDG]

My very old, rusty and faded LBT cost me $18 shipped when listed as a buy it now on ebay about 20 years ago.
Being sort of old i suspected it might be out of calibration.
I had pure lead and I had military specification 63/37 high purity electronic solder that I tested. I got the right values but I discovered that you can induce errors by your technique. Once I discovered that the time the load is applied needs to be consistent I got really good results.
But after calibrating my thumb nail with it I can do well enough without any kind of tool.

A lot of preferences here. Which is good. Healthy discussion is good. Did any of you pay less than $10 for your tester...NEW? Me, I did, took a while to learn how to use but for me ...and my budget...Pencil test is plenty good.

[RED BEAR]

i love my lee it is very easy to use as soon as you put the microscope i the dust bin and just scan it on your computer and use gimp (free photo program ) to count pixels to give you the dent size. you can blow up the scanned image to make it easy to count. results were dead on with pro hardness tester at work ( machine shop ).

[1bluehorse]

O.K. I can't stand it any longer.: I am going to question anybody's ability to compare BHN testers that can't even get the right spelling on one that a lot of you own and is one of the most popular. IT'S CABINE TREE, not cabintree or cabin tree. Yes I'm picking nits, but it's been mis-spelled every time it's shown up in this thread. Enough. I'm going to lump you all in with the guys that think there is such a thing as a Turrent press.....

[Traffer]

OK, so what is wrong with a Turrent prest. Personally I like my stingle sage prest.

[1bluehorse]

OK, so what is wrong with a Turrent prest. Personally I like my stingle sage prest.

Nothing, nothing at all. Just get it right. It's a Turnit press. Lee makes one that automagically turnits it's ownself so it's called an ottoindrex. Not like the othern's that you have to manuelly turn by hand. I'm with you on the Simple stage press also, that's my favorut one two. Mines a Co-axe made by Forester.

[EDG]

You need to learn how to spell ok.

O.K. I can't stand it any longer.: I am going to question anybody's ability to compare BHN testers that can't even get the right spelling on one that a lot of you own and is one of the most popular. IT'S CABINE TREE, not cabintree or cabin tree. Yes I'm picking nits, but it's been mis-spelled every time it's shown up in this thread. Enough. I'm going to lump you all in with the guys that think there is such a thing as a Turrent press.....

[ulav8r]

Nothing, nothing at all. Just get it right. It's a Turnit press. Lee makes one that automagically turnits it's ownself so it's called an ottoindrex. Not like the othern's that you have to manuelly turn by hand. I'm with you on the Simple stage press also, that's my favorut one two. Mines a Co-axe made by Forester.

No, No, No, it is a turret press. I hate turnips.

[Tazza]

I'm doomed. My spelling is shocking. My wife gives me grief about it often enough. Bring on spell check!

[winelover]

You need to learn how to spell ok.

You sir, need to learn how to recognize sarcasm.

Winelover

[jeepyj]

I have a LBT tester, it's a good 12 years old now, the sticker for the read out is a bit tatty, it really hasn't held up real well for the 10 odd times it has come out of the box to use.

It gives consistent readings, i have not tested the numbers against a known hardness but it does show a difference between known hard and soft metals.

I have a LBT and Cabine tree and sold my Saeco. The LBT is a great quick reference and I use it about often but agree with Tazza that the sticker being a little tattered up . I emailed to try to obtain a new one and never heard back. Since we're kind of on the subject of the LBT, I'm wondering if anyone else one has had any luck with a replacement sticker?

[solman]

A replacement sticker is a good idea. Although my tester is new the sticker is the only thing to worry about as long as reasonable care is taken in handling and tester storage.