Lee Hardness Testing Tool

[John Hill]

I have the Lee Hardness Testing Kit but am having a terrible time trying to hold both or either the microscope and or the sample boolit. It is like trying to stick a wet noodle up a wild cat's behind. Ugh! http://leeprecision.com/images/P/p-84.jpg
Has anyone devised an effective holding device to be able to operate this little gem? Lighting seems to also be important. I'll bet someone has built a holding jig. Any help is appreciated.
John

[Eddie17]

Cut the top off a clear plastic bottle. Make a hole in the cap to hold the microscope.
The clear plastic allows for light to pass through, though I use a small flashlight to help.
Depending on the sample I most of the time just lay on the v holder supplied.

[John Hill]

Cut the top off a clear plastic bottle. Make a hole in the cap to hold the microscope.
The clear plastic allows for light to pass through, though I use a small flashlight to help.
Depending on the sample I most of the time just lay on the v holder supplied.
Have you got a picture? I can't picture it.
Thanks
John

[Eddie17]

163051
Here you go.

[Rick Hodges]

I don't have a picture but...cut the top off of a 20oz pop bottle. put scope through the lid...it makes a scope holder that can be placed over the lead sample for reading. Cud a wedge out of the side for lighting. I just use a penlight flashlight.

[Screwbolts]

I use a shell holder to support the boolitz pointy end when pressing the ball into The Base, then the shell holder holds the boolit nicely for viewing with a water bottle top holding the scope.

Ken

[John Hill]

Now it makes sense.
Thanks
John

[matrixcs]

Not a holder answer but...
I have a printer that works as a copier and enlarges..
I slice off the side of the bullet with a sharp chisel and test.
I put the bullets on the copy glass and enlarge 400% and measure the copy with calipers...
Lots easier and frustration factor is reduced...
Is this method as accurate ??? works well enough for me and appears repeatable...

[bstone5]

I use the cut off top of a water bottle and a flash light works well and the scope stays dead still while looking to measure.

[Screwbolts]

This is how I use the tester, in my shop no additional lighting is needed. Picka shell holder to press the boolit against the ball then simply use it as the stand to hold the boolit fer the testing.

PS: drill the hole threw the top with your Unibit leaving the gasket in place , just go threw the steps on the on the bit until the scope just fits and the gasket hole cuts smaller making a nice holder.

163079

[Half Dog]

Check out YouTube for another option. I believe there is a video of someone that made a support that includes a small light.

[mdi]

I have used two methods with mine. First, my 'scope fits nicely in a 45 ACP sizing die. I used it in my single stage press; a strong light, 'scope in the die, bullet on the V shaped holder in the ram. But the method I use most is I have a magnifying visor (I believe it's 4x) and a dial caliper. With a strong light I can measure the dent with my calipers and use Lee's data to find hardness. Normally I'll do at least three tests on three different bullets. My comparisons of the two (scope vs caliper) are pretty consistent...

[Screwbolts]

I have used two methods with mine. First, my 'scope fits nicely in a 45 ACP sizing die. I used it in my single stage press; a strong light, 'scope in the die, bullet on the V shaped holder in the ram. But the method I use most is I have a magnifying visor (I believe it's 4x) and a dial caliper. With a strong light I can measure the dent with my calipers and use Lee's data to find hardness. Normally I'll do at least three tests on three different bullets. My comparisons of the two (scope vs caliper) are pretty consistent...

The Dial caliper and magnifying light are a great Idea and system of double checking or getting a backup reading. I am going to give this method a real good test. I have several Boolitz with dimples from testing to have a look at.

Ken

[bangerjim]

Or invest in a CabineTree hardness tester. I bought one a few years ago and never use the hard-to-use Lee tester any longer. I fiddled with holders and lights, but gave up on that dark path. And if you wear glasses, peeping thru that teeny microscope is very difficult, at least for me.

Fast & easy & accurate is nice! Check it out.

[montana_charlie]

If you just want to know that alloy A and alloy C are the same hardness, and alloy B is harder (or softer) the Cabine Tree tester will do it easily.
You only need to fiddle with the Lee tool if you want to know the actual Brinell Hardness Number.

[bangerjim]

If you just want to know that alloy A and alloy C are the same hardness, and alloy B is harder (or softer) the Cabine Tree tester will do it easily.
You only need to fiddle with the Lee tool if you want to know the actual Brinell Hardness Number.

There are sooooooo many variables (mechanical, optical, and physical) with the Lee tester. The Cabine gives you a number. Period. End of story. It is directly related to a look-up chart that is dead-on for Bhn. You still have to look up the answer on a chart with the Lee toy.

I have checked both against my NIST standards and a REAL hardness tester in my shop and both are acccurate enough for the toys we make. Cabine is just faster and MUCH easer to use.....in the shop and at the scrap yard. Try that one with your Lee thingy!

bangerjim

[W.R.Buchanan]

The only issue the Lee Tool has is the holding of the Optical Comparator. There are several options pictured above. Also several guys here have made small holders that have a cradle built in that holds the OC and boolit in the same relationship for easy measuring.

I always use my Big Optical Comparator in my shop to actually measure the dimple as I can measure it to a Ten Thousandth of an Inch .0001 and by interpolating the Lee chart actually deduce Bhn to .1 unit.

The Lee Penetrator is the best tool for doing this particular operation available to the hobbyist. It can be made to repeat exactly everytime.

If you set up your Reloading press so that the penetrator is to it's correct place in the die body when the press goes over center, you don't have to hold it in position for the required 30 seconds. The press just stays there. and this insures that you get repeatable results in your testing. If you can't get the same Readings 3 times in a row you haven't gotten a valid test. With this system you can easily do this right everytime.

The little optical comparator Lee provides is not new or peculiar to the Lee Hardness Tester. I had had one for 20 years before I ever bought a Lee Hardness Tester. It is a common Machinist tool from the 50's and 60's. The kicker is holding it steady enough to be able to interpolate the .002 scale.

The plastic bottle holder works just fine for this, and it costs you exactly nothing,,, Err maybe .05?

Randy

[6bg6ga]

The bottom line is you get what you pay for. You can either sit at the kids table with your Lee or move up to the grown up table with your Cabine Tree. Either will get the job done. I guess it depends on how much time you wish to use playing with your hardness tester. Spend say 10 seconds using the Cabine Tree or several minutes with the Lee after of course you find your reading glasses. I used both and will never pick up the Lee again. To each his own.

[trapper9260]

This is how I have my Lee set up to read it.you can adjust it the way you want and simple to make.164393

[William Yanda]

I use a shell holder to support the boolitz pointy end when pressing the ball into The Base, then the shell holder holds the boolit nicely for viewing with a water bottle top holding the scope.

Ken
Don't the Lee directions recommend against using the base as it was the last portion to solidify and may thus
not be indicative of the true boolet hardness?
Respectfully,
Bill

[Walter Laich]

Or invest in a CabineTree hardness tester. I bought one a few years ago and never use the hard-to-use Lee tester any longer. I fiddled with holders and lights, but gave up on that dark path. And if you wear glasses, peeping thru that teeny microscope is very difficult, at least for me.

Fast & easy & accurate is nice! Check it out.

+1 Well worth the money and easy to use.

[trapper9260]

Don't the Lee directions recommend against using the base as it was the last portion to solidify and may thus
not be indicative of the true boolet hardness?
Respectfully,
Bill

Yes it dose.

[mdi]

Well, I guess I'm in a mood this morning. The OP asked about his Lee tool and the "Anti-Lee League" comes out and spits it's pus all over telling all us poor, ignert Lee users jes how stupid or retarded we be. The Cabin Tree tool may be a better tool or perhaps they are just showing us Lee users their superior choice and inferring we are children for using Lee products? Did the OP ask for a replacement/"superior" tool? Are the Anti-Lee fellers so dedicated to running down Lee products that no matter the subject is concerning Lee that they feel it's their duty to "educate" us lowly Lee users?

I think I'll just go to the Lee Loader Forum where there are no Lee Haters and enjoy some level headed, open minded conversations...

jes an old Lee user's opinion

[shooter bob]

mdi you said it.I use different brands of reloading gear i have no problems with my lee tools.If a person is going to answer a post answer the question.DONT give your opinion on another product.

[W.R.Buchanan]

This is how I have my Lee set up to read it.you can adjust it the way you want and simple to make.164393

Ok this is a good idea and simple enough that most anyone could make something similar. AS I stated in my extensive thread above, the problem is holding the boolit and the Microscope at the same time. A simple stand like this will eliminate that problem and make getting accurate readings easy to do.

Also as I stated above none of the other tools out there have any way to calibrate them so after a while unless you have material of a known hardness to test the tool on you don't really know what you've got. Add a little mishandling to the mix and it is essentially useless.

The Lee Tool is a spring loaded plunger and you can't wear out the spring no matter how early you get up in the morning. But being able to take accurate measurements of the dimples is where the accuracy actually lies. And a stand to hold the optic is a great idea.

Randy

[ArrowJ]

I do not have the Lee tester, but this guy sells a stand. After adding the price I would consider saving up for a secondhand tester that is easier to read, but tester and stand together are still cheaper: http://www.ezorchid.com/CustomCast/CustomCast.htm

Other ideas: https://www.google.com/search?q=Lee+hardness+tester+stand and then look at just the image results. If you are handy you can find something. I would end up with a bottle from above or buying a stand :)

[dudel]

Had the same problem. Solved it with a few bits of wood (a 3d printer could do it as well). Simple, cheap and works.

164990

[daboone]

I used a child's microscope I got at goodwill for 2 bucks. Pulled out the optics and used the rack pinion tube to hold the Lee scope. A piece of kids play dough on the slide tray hold the test bullet.

[Eddie17]

MDI. Tried your way and gives same results as the Lee Scope. Thanks for the idea!

[Retumbo]

Won't use anything else...

[noisewaterphd]

I finally got myself an LBT tester. Super fast, reads the actual Brinell number.

It is truly awesome as a quick way to give me a pretty accurate idea of what my alloy hardness is.

But, if I want/need to know the exact BHN of my alloy, I still break out the Lee.

The Lee is definitely a pain in the rear to operate compared to others, but it is still the most accurate and repeatable tester.


There was a study a while back, somebody sent out a few of each hardness tester on the market, to a number of different folks. Along with the tester they sent along a handful of samples that were numbered, and tested on high dollar equipment before they were sent out. Each of the folks testing were to test each of the samples with the hardness tester they received, and report back their hardness reading of each alloy.

The result? Well, they were all pretty good, and all were close enough for our purposes. But, the Lee hardness tester was by far the most accurate, and repeatable tester of all. Everyone who received the Lee reported readings nearly identical to each other, and they were also the closest reading to that of the expensive harness testing equipment they used as a baseline.


At least, if my memory serves me correctly. This same study came up in a discussion on this forum not long ago. I am having a hard time finding it. Someone else will know where it is.

UPDATE: Found it http://www.lasc.us/Shay-BHN-Tester-Experiment.htm

The Cabine Tree was actually just as good as the Lee, depending on which number you decide matters the most. Either way, both were excellent.

[Retumbo]

Do this with your LBT

132581

[montana_charlie]

The Cabine gives you a number. Period. End of story. It is directly related to a look-up chart that is dead-on for Bhn.
If you test a piece of alloy that is the same hardness as (say) 20-1 lead-tin, your Cabine Tree will tell you it has a hardness of 10 BHN. It will tell you that because the old published charts say that 20-1 is 10 BHN.
But, if you check that alloy (or some foundry 20-1) with a tool that reads in BHN - instead of a number from a 'comparitive chart' - you will find that it's actual hardness is 7.8 BHN.

I use lead-tin bullets cast from 20-1 and 16-1. The harder alloy is used for slim-nosed bullets.
Those two alloys are 7.8 BHN and 8.2 BHN, after age-softening.
If either one was checked on a Cabine Tree tester, neither would produce 'true' results.


You still have to look up the answer on a chart with the Lee toy.
The chart just keeps the operator from having to do the math formula for each dimple.



The one thing I will give you on the Cabine Tree tester ...
The published charts are probably accurate for readings on antimonal alloys because those were tested by industry, then added to the charts.
That's why Lyman #2 Alloy is shown at 15 BHN ... Lyman did the testing and provided the numbers to be added to the charts. Therefore, the Cabine Tree comparitive chart is probably also reasonably accurate for antimonal alloys.

The lead-tin numbers in the old published charts are (most likely) 'derived' rather than 'actual', which would account for the inaccuracy of those numbers - and the subsequent error in CT's comparisons.