Hardness tester

[slasher]

I've been looking into hardness testers lately and it appears that the top names are the Lee Hardness Tester, Cabine Tree Tester, and the LBT.
The LBT seems to be a favorite and I can find posts about it up until a year ago or so but their domain has expired, www.lbtmolds.com, so I'm wondering if they just disappeared.
The Lee tester has good reviews and is not too expensive but would require the current press be removed from the mount to put the turret press back up to test. I've also read that if you wear glasses, which I do, that the little magnifying glass is difficult to use but there are mods you can do to make it easier to use.
The Carbine Tree seems to have good reviews too and seems to be a little more user friendly and would also be easier to use to test ingots, which I'd like to have the ability to do.
What's your opinion on these and am I leaving a tester out that I should be looking into?
Thanks

[poppy42]

If ya get the Lee at lot of people make a stand for the magnifier or use a child’s microscope for a stand. I just use a jewelers loop. I find it quicker and easier to use a loop, set of calipers, in the chart that Lee provides.

[Mike W1]

He seems to change addresses on occasion. I got some lube from him a couple months ago so try this approach.

I have and like the LBT tester.

Veral SmithLead Bullets Technology
A Division of
F.I.G. ENT. INC.
78592 Hwy 2
MOYIE SPRINGS, ID 83845
1 208 267 3588

LBTisAccuracy@localnet.com

[uscra112]

I have a Cabine Tree but I don't trust it. Having the penetrator rotate as it goes in doesn't seem to me to be a good design. Is it a boring tool? Shouldn't be.

The instrument I do trust is my SAECO. The only downside being that you can only test bullets. I made a "slug" mould that casts a simple flat-ended .45 caliber cylinder for easier handling. Extra work, but IMHO worth it.

The Cabine Tree tool I use on billets, to judge whether they should go in the pot or not.

[Bent Ramrod]

I have a LBT and a SAECO hardness tester.

I sometimes get slightly different readings on the same alloy between them, but the differences are close enough to assign to technique and/or sample shape.

I use the SAECO more than the LBT because I generally have a few culls after a casting session to check. The LBT requires more in the way of sample preparation than the SAECO; but it does read directly, whereas the SAECO gives a derivative reading that needs to be applied to a chart to get the actual BHN. This bothers some people, but not me.

[Dusty Bannister]

I have used the LBT and the Cabin Tree. Both are very good tools. I have the Cabin Tree and appreciate the fact that you can mark the indent reading on the ingot and not be too concerned about the actual hardness chart. I prepare the samples carefully and use a wide flat nosed bullet mold to make sample slugs when blending alloys. There may be some reading error between ingots and bullet samples and why introduce more variables.

I understand where some might be concerned about the indent point having an affect on the final reading. It is smooth, but a blunt point. If there is any "boring" affect, it would be consistent with every sample tested and be reflected on the final reading. I would look at that as a theory and not a factual issue. There is not likely a not of movement of that point against the sample with only one turn of the shaft to apply pressure to the sample.

Some have developed the ability to use the art pencils successfully to test hardness. I think that they all have some level of difficulty and do require practice to use well. Find which method serves your needs and then make your decision. Dusty

[GregLaROCHE]

I bought a Lee tester. I never really got the hang of it and wish I had spent more and gotten one of the other types.

[44magLeo]

I have the Lee. I use it on ingots a lot.
I just place the ingot on the ram insuch a way I can run it up without hitting anything. Run the ingot up against the frame of the press, thread the tester down till it hits the ingot. Then lower it a bit, screw in tester repeat till I can run the ingot up against the frame and have the plunger come flush. This way I don't have to try to hold the ram at just the right place to keep the plunger flush.
I can run through a bunch of ingots fairly quickly. Once I get them dimpled I just set the micro scope on the ingot. This holds it steady.
Leo

[10sandxs]

I have the LBT, Lee, and SAECO hardness testers... all work, but the LBT is the one that gets used 95% of the time...

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I like the Lee.
I have a tiny reloading press dedicated for hardness testing.
I did the Child's microscope mod (I bought the microscope at Goodwill for $1), I've found that this does require use of a flashlight or a well lit room, I have corrective lenses for an astigmatism, and don't have a problem, as long as there is enough light.

[bangerjim]

I used the Lee toy for a while and got tired of guestimating and squinting thru that stupid little scope. And getting the angle of the light just right so you could see the dimple.

Dumped it for the CabineTree tester. LOVE it! I replaced the mechanical dial indicator with a good digital dial indicator and it is now extremely accurate. I have calibrated/verified it against an NIST traceable hardness tester with know samples and it is far more accurate that we all need for simple casting purposes around here.

It is truly portable, so I can take it to the scrap yards and test any shape I find. The Lee will really only test boolits and is very difficult to test large shapes and works only at your loading bench in your press.

But buy and use what you can monetarily justify.

Any of the testers mentioned above are FAR better than pencils or your fingernail!!!!!!! [smilie=s:

[6622729]

I've been looking into hardness testers lately and it appears that the top names are the Lee Hardness Tester, Cabine Tree Tester, and the LBT.
The LBT seems to be a favorite and I can find posts about it up until a year ago or so but their domain has expired, www.lbtmolds.com, so I'm wondering if they just disappeared.
The Lee tester has good reviews and is not too expensive but would require the current press be removed from the mount to put the turret press back up to test. I've also read that if you wear glasses, which I do, that the little magnifying glass is difficult to use but there are mods you can do to make it easier to use.
The Carbine Tree seems to have good reviews too and seems to be a little more user friendly and would also be easier to use to test ingots, which I'd like to have the ability to do.
What's your opinion on these and am I leaving a tester out that I should be looking into?
Thanks

I had the Lee tester and hated that thing. Got rid of it and switched to the artist pencils. SOOO easy to use. I never looked back.

[luky-dude]

I used the Lee toy for a while and got tired of guestimating and squinting thru that stupid little scope. And getting the angle of the light just right so you could see the dimple.

Dumped it for the CabineTree tester. LOVE it! I replaced the mechanical dial indicator with a good digital dial indicator and it is now extremely accurate. I have calibrated/verified it against an NIST traceable hardness tester with know samples and it is far more accurate that we all need for simple casting purposes around here.

It is truly portable, so I can take it to the scrap yards and test any shape I find. The Lee will really only test boolits and is very difficult to test large shapes and works only at your loading bench in your press.

But buy and use what you can monetarily justify.

Any of the testers mentioned above are FAR better than pencils or your fingernail!!!!!!! [smilie=s:
What is and where can I get the digital dial indlicator?

[Conditor22]

the lee tester work fine with a stand and light source, that being said, I still reach for my pencils when I want to get an close estimate of lead hardness or I'm going out to buy lead.

[rcslotcar]

I use the Saeco. I cast a few wad cutter bullets as I'm making ingots then mark the hardness.

[John Boy]

Practice how to use it and the Lee is 100% accurate plus mounted on a Lee 3 hole turret it is instantly available to measure bullets and ingots up to 6 pounds which the other testers can’t do in all respects. Plus it is half the price of the other testers. My Lee has measured accurately in excess of over 2000 Lbs of Pb ingots and thousands of bullets

[Larry Gibson]

I mounted my Lee tester in a microscope. I have a small desk lamp on my loading bench that works well with it. The Lee, when held steady as in the microscope is easy to see through, quick to use and consistent in readings.

269041269042

[Conditor22]

One thing to notice is that Larry has the boolit stuck to a large sheet of something making aligning the boolit under the scope sooooooo much easier.

https://i.imgur.com/CjoIDzi.png

[Lloyd Smale]

i have a cabin tree and a seaco and had a lbt. The cabin tree is hands down the best and most repeatable tester. Id rate the seaco second and the lbt 3rd. When i parted with one it was a no brainer to dump the lbt.

[mvozz]

Interesting thread! I was in the same boat a couple of years ago and read all of the opinions and went with the Cabine Tree and I am glad I did. I have taken it with me to test lead before I buy it and I was lucky that I had it so I knew what I was getting. The ability to test ingots is what won me over. I don't think I will be buying anything else.

[gnappi]

I no longer have access to a BHT but I found out something just as good for bullets.

I found that if I use my thumbnail (Thumbnail is Mohs hardness scale is 2.5 Vs. pencil lead @ 1.0 on same scale) works pretty darn good... it's always "handy" and it NEVER gets lost :-). I've "tested" a lot of cast bullets I did not cast and would not buy them. My home made cast bullets are plenty hard enough.

I wish someone with a BH tester would compare it to their thumbnail and a pencil!

[AndyC]

Thanks to the info on this thread, I ordered - and just received - a Carbine Tree tester:

https://i.imgur.com/rjvOBQU.jpg

I'm looking forward to playing with it.

[Mitch]

I have the LBT tester and have had good luck with it.

Ok now another thought.With the modern day we can get out lead analized there is not much need for a hardness tester maybe got a double check.I have found that the lead i had analized and use for my alloys checkes realy close to what it should with the LBT.

[AndyC]

I've been piddling around with it a little this evening - seems the metals I bought years ago on eBay sold as Linotype (4% tin, 12% antimony) is actually Electrotype (2.5% tin, 2.5% antimony), based on the hardness results - only 11 Bhn instead of 19.

Not that I blame the seller - hell, everyone seems to sell printing-press letters as "Linotype" as a generic term and I'm sure they genuinely don't know the difference - but it's annoying when you're trying to reach a certain hardness in your alloy and assume that what you have is one alloy when it's actually a much softer one.

For that alone this was an excellent purchase.

[dtknowles]

I have the LBT tester and have had good luck with it.

Ok now another thought.With the modern day we can get out lead analized there is not much need for a hardness tester maybe got a double check.I have found that the lead i had analized and use for my alloys checkes realy close to what it should with the LBT.

Hardness is more than a function of composition. Heat treatment and aging have an effect as well.

I have and use a Lee, it works, I have the scope in a microscope stand. You can use it to measure other things too. I do have to take my glasses off to use it as I am near sighted. It might not be the best but it is what I have and it works.

Tim

[Mitch]

I guess basic metallurgy not longer matters.

but then my fault for getting off topic in the fist place.

Just my opinion to help out for what is is worth.

[Lead pot]

I have the Lee and Saeco but I use the Lee because the dimple is more precise for comparison of the alloy temper. I don't care what a BHN reading is because all of these under 100 dollar testers are not precise enough.
I use the Lee for comparison. I cast a bullet with my alloy mix and take a sample of the known alloy mix. Lets face it, it's almost impossible to get lead in a pure form anymore. Most is recycled that has WW and other stuff in the mix and the asme goes with tin.
Every batch of new alloy I make and that is usually 200 lbs but I can only make one batch of around 50 lbs because this is how big my dutch oven holds so I end up making 4-5 batches. Each batch I take a sample and if the Lee dimple is above or below 7.8 I add tin or lead till it measures 7.8 because this is the alloy I use for my Sharps for the long range matches.
When I get the 4-5 batch ingots that are stacked so not to get them mixed, usually 4 stacks, I take one ingot off each stack and remelt them and get them fluxed and blended so all are the same temper. Yes it's a lot of extra work but I want precise bullet hardness and weight. When I cast my black powder bullets the weight variances are less than 1 grain, 5/10 usually with bullets that range 400 gr to 700 gr for my calibers I shoot.
As far as holding the Lee tester I just take a sizing die that is the closest to the lee tube and mount it in the in the press and stick the scope through the die body and I have a LED light mounted for a light source.
It's just my way but it gives me the confidence knowing that it was not the bullet that kicked up the dust missing the target.........

[slasher]

So, in researching over the last couple of days I watched a video or two about using pencils. This seems to be so simple and also very cheap. I'm really leaning towards this now.
Am I missing something?

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

[Petander]

I use the Saeco. I cast a few wad cutter bullets as I'm making ingots then mark the hardness.

This is my technique with the Saeco tester,too.

Some bullet sizes/profiles are just very hard to get straight in there.

[725]

I use the Saeco, too, and at times it gives different readings, which, of course, I attribute to my hands having nothing but thumbs. Still with repeated tests, I come to an average that seems to reflect the real world. When not interested in such precise measurements, I drop an ingot on the concrete floor and if it rings, it's hard; if it thunks, it's soft.

[hermans]

Another vote for Cabine Tree!

[dale2242]

I have the Saeco.
I just file a flat spot on top of a pointy bullet to use it with this tester.