Hardness testers...How Necessary??

[kevmc]

Or can I just compare samples "close enough"?
I've got some Lyman #2 and 20/1 from rotometals to compare to......
To those that have them...do you use them regularly??

Worth the expense??

[Walter Laich]

Depends on how important bullet hardness is to you. I have a Cabine Tree tester. Very good piece of equipment.

When I put a new batch of lead together I give a quick check. For me, if it's close it gets used. Others will check every time.

Large batches of unknown lead check checked.

I enjoy using it which is part of its draw for me.

walt

[John Boy]

Hardness testers...How Necessary??
As necessary as a thermometer or speedometer.

To those that have them...do you use them regularly??
Yes - every batch of ingots is age tested and marked accordingly
Why? I shoot primarily BPCR at distances 200m to 1000yds. Alloy composition is important for determination of bullet slump and obturation in the grooves based on the round psi for accuracy at these distances.
Also, I'm a scrap yard junkie. When I bend a piece of sheet lead believed to be grade C, I know it's Bhn 5. The other stuff can vary. So when I mix an alloy batch using aged ingots, ie 1:10 - 1:16 - 1:20 - 1:30, Lyman #2, etc, I want the calculated hardness - not a SWAG

[TES]

yes it can help you figure out anomalies in your production quickly. some smelts got through that were way to soft and I was able to identify the bad batch before they got loaded. worth every penny to me.

[BruceB]

Let's see here....

I've been casting intensively since 1966, and by now my production has reached well over 1/2 MILLION bullets of almost every sort from .22 to .50BMG. Much of that output has been in the form of .38 wadcutters for Bullseye pistol competition (over 200,000 bullets). My M1A has now fired over 7,000 cast bullets with great success, and my .416 Rigby has totaled over 3,000 cast loads with superb accuracy (under 1" for TEN rounds at 100 yards).

Over that time-span, the alloys used have been varied, to say the least, and so have the furnaces and tooling involved.

To this day, I own neither a thermometer nor a hardness tester., and the bullets produced are amply precise for MY purposes.

Certainly, the demands of long-range competition mandate the maintenance of minimal variation in EVERYTHING, and if I was involved in such activity I too would be testing alloys with the best of the group. As it is, and not being involved in rifle matches, my current techniques work just fine FOR ME.

So.... I reckon it comes down to what purposes you intend for YOUR bullets.

P.S. As to the expense involved, the last time I STARTED an inventory of my casting and loading equipment for insurance purposes, I quit when I reached $20,000 with a LOOONG way yet to go.... it's not the cost of the tester and thermometer that keep them off my bench.

[GRUMPA]

The way I view those hardness testers is this.

Do I need one of them?....Nope

Do I want one of them?....Yes

For me it's all about unanswered questions more than anything, when I use it I get the answer. No guess work on my end.

It boils down to "How fussy are you" and I'm the type that wants to be as precise as possible.

[Larry Gibson]

The way I view those hardness testers is this.

Do I need one of them?....Nope

Do I want one of them?....Yes

For me it's all about unanswered questions more than anything, when I use it I get the answer. No guess work on my end.

It boils down to "How fussy are you" and I'm the type that wants to be as precise as possible.

That sums it up for me.

Larry Gibson

[John Allen]

I personally used to cast without one. Now I would not. I like to know what is gonig in my pots. It comes in handy for separating out the hard stuff from the medium hard stuff. I keep the hard stuff for cast rifle bullets, the medium hard for pistol and of course the dead soft for the smokepoles. I have a cabin tree it is super easy to use. I got it from buffalo arms.

[WILCO]

Worth the expense??

Yes. Not knowing BHN is akin to walking around in the dark with your hands in front of you.

[AlaskanGuy]

I just love mine... Use it all the time to determine what i am doing....

[lancem]

Much like BruceB I've been casting for 40 years without one, and I'd find it hard to believe it would make things any better for me as I'm very happy with the results I'm getting now. Guess I'd rather spend the money on something else.

[bangerjim]

If you have a problem with the $$ a Cabine costs, buy a $10 set of artist pencils and read the threads on here how to use it vs the approx bhn.

That is close enough for gubmint work.

I prefer knowing what I am dealin' with and bought the Cabine. I also have a Lee which I do not use due to the time needed and difficulty in use.

It is your choice!

banger

[AlaskanGuy]

It kinda reminds me of casting without slugging your barrel... You just dont know for sure... Its all about controlling the variables that you are able to control.. Some dont mind, but i wanna know... You can get a lee cheapo tester for under 100 bucks... How much you use it is up to you... But you have it then and if you wanna know, its easy to find out... Sometimes it is better to not know...lol

[BruceB]

By way of expanding on my NON_use of a hardness tester or thermometer....

My raw materials have been simple throughout my casting years.

In the Northwest Territories, where I started my casting, I used oNLY TWO bullet metals. A close friend bought an old print shop, with seven tons of linotype attached. Therefore, I shot/cast linotype ONLY, along with some pure (cable-sheathing) lead. I cast only pistol bullets, and only my magnum bullets were sometimes softened a bit with pure lead on a 1/3 lead:2/3 lino formula which worked well (without testing hardness).

Muzzle-loaders and cap-and-ball handguns saw only pure lead.

Ergo, no need for testing hardness. Linotype was linotype, and pure lead was pure lead.

When I moved to Nevada in '97, and added serious rifle casting to my repertoire, I used ONLY lead wheelweights which I rendered-down in large batches of several hundred pounds. Ergo.... no need for testing, because they are what they are, and I have no interest in changing them.

I sort out the stick-on weights for use as "pure lead"..... they too, are whatever they are, and work well enough for my uses. No need for testing.

Thermometer? Those who are familiar with my "speedcasting" routine may recall that my RCBS furnace is set at MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE 100% of the time. Why would I need a thermometer? My results speak for themselves, with very consistent bullets, and I simply don't care what the exact temperature may be

To those who think I'm flying blind or groping in the dark, I will say this: my bullets are well-cast, fully filled-out, consistent in weight and dimensions. The accuracy they deliver in my (twenty-or-so) rifles is ample for my purposes. Y'all go ahead and do it YOUR way.... I'm quite happy with the bullets I produce.

Want another heresy? I also RARELY slug rifle barrels, using sizing diameters a tad larger than what is "commonly accepted". This means .311" in all my .30s except the "fat" .30s such as .303 British, and it means .358" in 9mms, and .432" in the .44s. ALL of my guns in these calibers shoot beautifully, without 'leading' or other problems.

Over the years of my casting, I see an increasing trend toward needlessly complicating a fairly-simple procedure. The presence of better measuring devices has led to a perceived "need" for these devices. If one LIKES to get into the minutiae of casting, with hardness testers etc etc, well and good.... have at it. However, this ol' buzzard is here to tell you that much of it is NOT necessary to create either good bullets or accurate results.

[Maven]

"Over the years of my casting, I see an increasing trend toward needlessly complicating a fairly-simple procedure. The presence of better measuring devices has led to a perceived "need" for these devices. If one LIKES to get into the minutiae of casting, with hardness testers etc etc, well and good.... have at it. However, this ol' buzzard is here to tell you that much of it is NOT necessary to create either good bullets or accurate results." ....BruceB

Bruce, Thanks for saying what I'm sure many have been thinking. With respect to all the "things" we now must have to cast and shoot better, my neighbor (who's not a shooter) says it best: Follow the money.

Best regards,

Paul

[detox]

Be sure to label your 20/1 or Lyman #2 bullets. I use Zip-Loc bags to store. Sometimes i have to use my Saeco bullet hardness tester to identify what is hard or soft, because i failed to label bag. I like my quick and easy to use Saeco, but lots of people prefer the Cabin Tree. The Lee version is not user friendly.

[Bret4207]

I have a Cabine Tree, I wanted it, I got it, I've used it. But- I can take the same alloy, treat it 3 different ways and get you 3 different BHN. I can take 3 different alloys and treat it to give the same BHN. IOW- the BHN is only part of the story. All it is is a relative number. It doesn't begin to tell you make up of the alloy, it's ductility, it's brittleness. It doesn't tell you as much as it does.

My advice? Don't think for a second it's going to revolutionize your cast boolits.

[btroj]

I cast for well over 25 years without a hardness tester. Having one lets me categorize bullets by hardness but it doesn't make them shoot better.

I use my tester maybe once a month or so.

Like Bruce I own no thermometer, don't need one. No PID either. What I do have is decades of experience that guide me. I have cast well over a ton of bullets and that knowledge is worth far more than any device.

[Dan Cash]

Not necessary. Been casting over 40 years and 36 of them with out a tester. Got a Cabine Tree tester and find it extremely useful for maintaining some rational uniformity of alloys made from mystery metals. Would not be without it.
Dan

[Garyshome]

I like to know what is going in my pots. It comes in handy for separating out the hard stuff from the medium hard stuff. I keep the hard stuff for cast rifle bullets, the medium hard for pistol and of course the dead soft for shotguns. Yes!

[Mk42gunner]

Or can I just compare samples "close enough"?
I've got some Lyman #2 and 20/1 from rotometals to compare to......
To those that have them...do you use them regularly??

Worth the expense??

They are not necessary, but can be helpful. Reread the posts by Bruce, Grumpa and Bret.

I have a Lee, and have used it a few times. Now it sits on the shelf, keeping the lonely reloading dies company.

I bought a Saeco tester, thinking it would be easier to use than the Lee. I did not like it so I passed it on to another member. If I ever buy another it will be the Cabine Tree, but don't hold your breath waiting on me to buy one.

If I shot a lot of long range rifle matches, it might be a different story, but I mainly plink with my hand cast bullets.

Robert

[geargnasher]

The precision you demand from your guns, or don't, determines the precision and repeatability you require, or don't, from your process.

I will not be without either tool because they are required for some of what I do.

Gear

[220]

Is it essential? No,
Is it nice to have? Yes
I've got the cheap Lee version and find it useful, I've been casting for less than 10 years and got it soon after I started. Found it great for confirming what I thought was correct. COW were close to the BHN quoted, same for SOW, range lead can vary greatly so great for telling me exactly what I have. Doesn't get used regularly but when ever I smelt a batch of mystery metal out it comes.

[DRNurse1]

Excellent thread here and just a couple of observations:

You experienced folks who cast relatively known material to meet your shooting needs gained both the experience and material over time. A hardness tester allows that time curve to shorten somewhat by generating a 'known' or relatively consistent comparison point between alloys and lots. I learned, and am still learning, through experience as well but I would have loved to know about the chore boy lead remover before I shot 40:1 (maybe 50:1) through my competition pistol barrel.

And a word about the expense, or do I need one or just want one: I use a shout cut (The Redneck BHN method) learned here to check my alloys and boolits periodically through the production cycle. I am not trying to be a commercial caster with consistent and repeatable results nor do I need the precision of long range riflemen to shoot in my pistol competitions. Likewise, I shoot pistols that meet my needs rather than buying a precision tool from Cabot, Chambers Custom, or Dr Nick which can shoot high master out of the box. I just cannot justify the cost of such a tool when I need expendables like primers and powder, but I sure would like one. I am saving for my Cabin Tree (best one out there) but the Red Neck version meets my needs right now.

And a word to the new, novice, and casters with limited experience: You may have noticed the experienced folks started simple, with one or two known alloys which met their needs. They did not mention a mentor but I would strongly suggest you find someone you can watch (YouTube is good, but it is not the same as being there) and who can watch you.

And as far as the mentor thing goes, be patient and kind: the last person I mentored wanted to learn to cast for his 9MM. We did that over several casting sessions, then he disappeared for about six months. Then, I heard he complained to everyone who would listen how I did not know a thing about casting or loading or teaching the same. Turns out he had leaded three pistols and his hunting rifle by shooting too soft/ non GC loads in his 30-06, .44mag, .357mag and 9MM. He eventually complained to someone who knew me and chose to share that complaint with me. We got together after church one afternoon to discuss the issues and he 'discovered' that he had learned just enough to make good 9MM loads, but not enough to make magnum or rifle loads. Had he returned to me when he ran into issues, I may have directed him to better resources or a rifle/ magnum mentor (I shoot/ load for neither so my experience is only academic). Live and learn, that darned experience thing, but the damage to my reputation from a loose Tyro....well, at least I am not trying to make a living off this stuff.

Happy Casting, folks.

[Bent Ramrod]

I picked up a SAECO and an LBT tester at gun shows, mostly because they were low priced and for curiosity's sake. I tested a bunch of various alloys, mostly scrap and lino/wheelweight mixtures, but also some weighed tin/lead combinations. It looked like 20:1 lead/tin shot best with grease groove boolits in certain rifles, but not so much better that it correlated to real quantum leaps in accuracy at the target over various scrap alloys. I could wipe out the "advantage with one shot. So the testers sat for a while on the shelf with other equipment I've accumulated that provides "too much information" for the shooter. I could distinguish highly alloyed lead from fairly pure lead by inspection and the "clink test" and that was easy and good enough.

When I started shooting paper patched boolits in black powder rifles, the hardness testers really came into their own. Intuitively, one might think that a soft alloy would be indicated, as soft or softer than the 4-8 BHN grease groove alloy I was using. But suddenly I was finding that alloys in the 9-12 BHN range were clustering much closer than softer alloys, and recovered boolits showed the rifling was as well engraved as the softer alloys. So now the paper patched alloys get the BHN check. I'll probably try some even harder alloys in the future to see if the trend continues.

So I guess hardness testers fit into the adage that all knowledge is good but sometimes you need to work to find a use for it.

[detox]

Hardness testers are expensive fun...i like them.

[DeadWoodDan]

just finishing up a materials class and discovered they have three different machines. Wish i knew this 3yrs ago when i started back! guess what i'm going to do over x-mas break

[Outpost75]

Good references:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?75455-Testing-hardness-with-pencils

http://www.lasc.us/brennan_3-2_bulletcastingmetals.htm

But truth be told, the vast majority of my shooting is in revolvers, cowboy rifles and military bolt rifles using soft alloys and plainbased bullets. I determine "soft" alloy by the "scratch, thud and snap test" taught to me as a young man by none other than Frank Marshall, Jr.

Any ingot you can mark with your thumbnail is probably no harder than 11BHN.

If that ingot also "thuds" rather than "rings" when dropped onto a concrete shop floor,it is good for revolver bullets as-is.

A pour of four ingots connected together by overflowing the ingot mold, if no harder than 12 BHN should bend when struck with a hammer, rather than snapping off the individual ingots.

If your thumbnail slides across and only makes a shiny spot where the surface was polished and "rings" on the concrete floor when dropped, it is probably harder than 12 BHN.

A pour of four ingots connected by overflowing the ingot mold will snap individual ingots apart when struck with a hammer if they are harder than about 12 BHN.

If an individual one pound ingot clamped 1/4 of its length in a vise can be broken in two with a single sharp sledge hammer blow, rather than bending, it is "probably" harder than 20 BHN and can be mixed 50-50 with wheelweights for rifle bullet alloy.

[Bret4207]

Good references:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?75455-Testing-hardness-with-pencils

http://www.lasc.us/brennan_3-2_bulletcastingmetals.htm

But truth be told, the vast majority of my shooting is in revolvers, cowboy rifles and military bolt rifles using soft alloys and plainbased bullets. I determine "soft" alloy by the "scratch, thud and snap test" taught to me as a young man by none other than Frank Marshall, Jr.

Any ingot you can mark with your thumbnail is probably no harder than 11BHN.

If that ingot also "thuds" rather than "rings" when dropped onto a concrete shop floor,it is good for revolver bullets as-is.

A pour of four ingots connected together by overflowing the ingot mold, if no harder than 12 BHN should bend when struck with a hammer, rather than snapping off the individual ingots.

If your thumbnail slides across and only makes a shiny spot where the surface was polished and "rings" on the concrete floor when dropped, it is probably harder than 12 BHN.

A pour of four ingots connected by overflowing the ingot mold will snap individual ingots apart when struck with a hammer if they are harder than about 12 BHN.

If an individual one pound ingot clamped 1/4 of its length in a vise can be broken in two with a single sharp sledge hammer blow, rather than bending, it is "probably" harder than 20 BHN and can be mixed 50-50 with wheelweights for rifle bullet alloy.

Did you read that from Uncle Frank or did you actually know the man? I absolutely adore his writing, he's one of the ones I would have like to have known.

[Outpost75]

Did you read that from Uncle Frank or did you actually know the man? I absolutely adore his writing, he's one of the ones I would have like to have known.

I knew Frank personally and he taught me how to shoot the M1 Garand when I was twelve years old.
When I was older I shot benchrest with him, Homer Culver and Max Brant. He coached our Junior highpower team when I first went to Camp Perry in 1966 and I attended his funeral when he was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

[dikman]

Being a BP shooter I didn't think I'd need one, but having just jammed my Remmie by inadvertently casting harder balls now I'm not so sure. Because I'm scrounging lead wherever I can I need some way of determining its hardness relative to pure lead.

I've sorted out powder load, patch thickness and lubes, now it looks like bullet hardness is rearing its ugly head!

A bit later in the day - I got curious about this Cabine Tree tester that gets mentioned a lot, so looked it up. A very simple, elegantly designed device! It shouldn't be hard to make one, using the dial gauge from my lathe. Of course, it won't be "calibrated" the same, due to me using a different spring, but that won't matter. All I need is something that will let me test samples, using soft lead as a reference, and give repeatable results. The soft lead will be my base line and the range scrap, which is very hard in comparison, will be my upper limit.

At least it should stop me from using the wrong lead/mix and casting the balls too hard!

[Bret4207]

I knew Frank personally and he taught me how to shoot the M1 Garand when I was twelve years old.
When I was older I shot benchrest with him, Homer Culver and Max Brant. He coached our Junior highpower team when I first went to Camp Perry in 1966 and I attended his funeral when he was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

Wow, I'm truly jealous! Franks writing appeals to me on so may levels. I collected as many of his articles as I could from the CBA Fouling Shot. That started getting expensive, so I got the idea of publishing his collected articles going. If I never did anything else in life, I'm glad I did that. I have the CD and enjoy it immensely. Uncle Franks info always works for me and he gives me a smile too!

Anyway, I'm jealous. Any stories you'd like to tell? I'm all ears!

[vintagesportsman]

Well, thought I needed one, not sure now? I am new to casting (2 years now) and no longer waste my time with jacketed bullets. That said, here is my dilemma: I want to hunt with my lead bullets. Shooting paper I get under 1" groups all day with recycled hardball from a yard sale (boxes of 41 caliber mostly that I melt down when needed). They shoot great from my Mausers. They also do NOT deform, flatten, mushroom, you name it: not in sand, or wood, or anything else! Can't shoot deer with those, so...thought I would get a tester and go for 12-14 BHN (as I am told that is a good bhn for flat nosed hunting rounds on deer). Cannot spend the cash though, buggers are E.X.P.E.N.S.I.V.E.

[Bret4207]

Well, thought I needed one, not sure now? I am new to casting (2 years now) and no longer waste my time with jacketed bullets. That said, here is my dilemma: I want to hunt with my lead bullets. Shooting paper I get under 1" groups all day with recycled hardball from a yard sale (boxes of 41 caliber mostly that I melt down when needed). They shoot great from my Mausers. They also do NOT deform, flatten, mushroom, you name it: not in sand, or wood, or anything else! Can't shoot deer with those, so...thought I would get a tester and go for 12-14 BHN (as I am told that is a good bhn for flat nosed hunting rounds on deer). Cannot spend the cash though, buggers are E.X.P.E.N.S.I.V.E.

First, get yourself a nice FN mould. Second, find a load it really likes. Third, go hunting and pop the target in the vitals, or better aim to break the shoulders. THey can't run with the front end busted. 4th, butcher game and eat. FN designs work fine for hunting and cast usually penetrates deer size, from military rounds, through both sides. If you want a softer alloy, that's great too. Cut your stuff with pure lead. But getting cast to mushroom like a classic Core-lokt advertisement? That takes some doing. Cast tends not to have the "bang, flop" result of a high speed jacketed round. You shoot, watch the target and give it some time to lay down and die. That's not what modern hunters are used to, I know.

[btroj]

Bret speaks the truth.

Put a decent sized hole thru the heart or lungs and deer don't go far. A 30 with a flat nose at 1700 will do just fine.

Expansion isn't required, I do add some pure to reduce chance of a bullet being brittle and breaking up.

[Rooster59]

I would love to have one but can't justify the cost. I soothe the pain of poverty by musing if Billy Dixon used one on the bullets he made just prior to knocking that indian off his horse at Adobe Wells.

[BruceB]

At the risk of boring everyone to death (again), I will mention something that WORKS: CAST SOFTPOINTS.

Do a search for "softpoint", and you'll find loads of info on creating bullets which WILL expand, WILL hold together, and WILL penetrate.

In the bargain, they can be made in the SAME mould one already uses.... zero additional cost.

Quite a few members have reported great success with such bullets; the concept works well. I set out to make cast bullets which behave like Nosler Partitions, and I believe the method comes close to that objective.

[dikman]

I cobbled this together today, partly out of curiosity to see if it would work (and would give repeatable results). I'm still experimenting with the spring part, trying to work out just how strong it needs to be (pretty strong, methinks). I rummaged through my current pile of range scrap, pulled out all the (relatively) intact bullets and sorted them into matching piles. Trying these would give reasonably repeatable figures, but when I tried it on an ingot made from range scrap the reading was lower and not quite as consistent. I think I need to try a few different ingots and see what readings I get.

Pure lead is a problem, being so soft. The testing point is actually a hardened steel concrete nail (very hard!!) and really digs into the lead. It appears to dig in differently if it's an ingot or a round ball (I'm wondering whether it's because the .451 RB doesn't have enough mass around it so is "spreading" more).

Looks like more experimenting is in order........
88945

[Bret4207]

So you copied Gussys Cabine Tree tester. Now what?

[btroj]

Now he has to calibrate it. How much penetration does his device get with 20-1? Bet it isn't the same as Cabin Tree.

[geargnasher]

All you need is a steel bb the right size, to small plates of steel (one with a 1/8" divot drilled into it for the bb), a good 0-1" mic, a magnifying glass, and a bathroom scale. Richard Lee's Modern Reloading, 2nd ed. or some time on the internet will provide specifics of ball pressure, ball diameter, and a chart showing how to translate dimple size to hardness.

Or, you could spend fifty bucks on the Lee and be done with it.

Gear

[dikman]

As I said before, the design, and principle of operation, is quite simple. Given enough time thinking about it I'm pretty sure I would have come up with a similar concept, so why not use it? It is for my use only, I have no intention of trying to copy and sell it.
Obviously, it won't be "calibrated", but that isn't important to me (although starting with pure sheet lead as a base it wouldn't be hard to work something out). I'm not interested in actual Brinell values anyway, just a method of determining the hardness of my ingots relative to pure lead (to make sure I don't use the wrong stuff in my casting pot).

Doing a lot of testing with it has been rather interesting. Sheet lead gives consistent low readings. I sorted some intact bullets from my range scrap and grouped them into like groups. These also were fairly consistent within each group. Measuring my ingots, however, shows some variation, which I put down to them being triangular cross-section and so not having a nice flat surface against one of the measuring faces. I cast a couple of small circular discs from the batch I melted today, and that was a better method of testing them. Round balls, however, are a real problem with this type of device. I cannot get consistent readings. I tried hitting them with a hammer on an anvil, to give two flat surfaces, but I suspect this had the effect of compressing/hardening the lead as they read harder than they were!

I have more range scrap than pure, and this will at least give me some method of determining the effect of mixing the two in various ratios.

The Cabine Tree unit is very nicely made, and it would be nice to have one, but for my needs I can't justify the $200 or so that it would cost me. (That will go a long way towards the plasma cutter I'm looking at!).