Precision Reloading new Steel load data, wad sheets for all!

[Dave in AZ]

https://www.precisionreloading.com/view ... dium=email

Didn't look at the actual loads, but all the sheets are brand new 2018 for the whole TUWSBL series (20ga, 16ga, 12ga all), plus their other wads.

HOWEVER< I did see 16 new 16ga loads, 15/16 and 1oz loads in aSteel and BlueDot. They're slow, 1230-1363 fps, so not as good as what folks have worked up and posted already but still.

The 20ga loads have a bunch of 7/8oz listed in 2.75 and 3" hulls, but pretty slow.
The 1oz and 7/8oz 12ga loads look nice, but the 1-1/8oz are slow.

Still, nice to have someone publishing data. I'll have to compare to spreadsheets to see if it's new or just republished.

[jsh909]

Thanks Dave, I will check these out when I get a chance.

[fowledlogic]

I gotta tell ya, this data disappoints me greatly!!! Every load with Alliant Steel powder uses a Federal 209A primer. They are slow!!! A particular 12 gauge load with a Remington STS hull has an 8.5 grain reduction. The old velocity is listed as 1,423 fps and the new 1,284 fps. As BT Justice has pointed out a number of times on this forum, the new Alliant Steel does not need a Federal 209A primer. I appreciate that Precision has offered these free of charge, but the results floor me and not in a good way. I'll look at the rest of the loads more closely later. I had downloaded these this morning and before I could look at them we had another power outage in my neighborhood that lasted four hours. This one was planned I found out later. I wasn't apprised of it. Suddenly the computer went dead along with the rest of A.C. world in my house. Maybe a good use for some of these loads would be duplexing with HW15. Oh well. I did not see a mention of lot numbers used, but that is the norm. I guess it confirms that newer lot Steel powder is hotter. Especially with a Fed 209A primer!

[Tman91]

Agreed. The 10 gauge loads with steel are slow too. 1200 fps? C'mon now

Sent from my SM-J337V using Tapatalk

[BT Justice]

I gotta tell ya, this data disappoints me greatly!!! Every load with Alliant Steel powder uses a Federal 209A primer. They are slow!!! A particular 12 gauge load with a Remington STS hull has an 8.5 grain reduction. The old velocity is listed as 1,423 fps and the new 1,284 fps. As BT Justice has pointed out a number of times on this forum, the new Alliant Steel does not need a Federal 209A primer. I appreciate that Precision has offered these free of charge, but the results floor me and not in a good way. I'll look at the rest of the loads more closely later. I had downloaded these this morning and before I could look at them we had another power outage in my neighborhood that lasted four hours. This one was planned I found out later. I wasn't apprised of it. Suddenly the computer went dead along with the rest of A.C. world in my house. Maybe a good use for some of these loads would be duplexing with HW15. Oh well. I did not see a mention of lot numbers used, but that is the norm. I guess it confirms that newer lot Steel powder is hotter. Especially with a Fed 209A primer!

This is one reason I set my 10 gauge manual up the way I did with Start and Max loads for STEEL powder plus used various primers according to what kinds of pressures and ignition qualities the loads were actually showing. One thing that really bothered me over the years is a good quantity of published load information for shotguns shells has never really changed it's still the same as it was 40 years ago. My take on it is with these newer High energy powders like STEEL and Longshot, lot to lot variation seems to become much more critical than it did years ago with older powders that had half the Nitroglycerin content that these newer powder have now. It also seems newer lots of STEEL compared to older lots of STEEL powder are not so much "hotter" as they are much easier to ignite and as was stated you don't need a Federal 209A primer to get good ignition, which apparently a lot of published date out there also hasn't caught on to yet.
All I can say is use common sense and caution with a lot of these newer lots of STEEL powder and don't be afraid to reduce a recipe down or switch from a magnum primer to a standard primer if you feel it's necessary.

[John Singer]

The 70's called. They are missing their steel shot recipes.

[BT Justice]

The 70's called. They are missing their steel shot recipes.

Best guess and just a guess, Precisions noticed the variation/change in STEEL powder also, since all Alliant keeps saying is nothings changed but it seems everybody who uses STEEL has noticed a change, Precision is playing it safe and using reduced powder charges to compensate for any variations. Can say I blame them for it.

[fowledlogic]

Singer, you crack me up!

[fowledlogic]

In the 20 gauge loads I did find the use of a non-Fed209A primer with Alliant Steel powder. About a 2 grain increase in powder with a Cheddite 209 over the same load with 209A primer. I looked at Precision's website and they still sell their steel shot reloading manual Edition 12 and the Lightning Steel Edition 2. My edition 12 is from 2003 and Lightning Steel 2 is from Oct. 2008.

[fowledlogic]

As a recent example of a safe load with a bit of Alliant Steel powder in it, here's boiler's tested loading of the HG load. https://www.duckhuntingchat.com/forum/v ... 4&t=897670
The average pressure of 5 shells is 11,440 psi. A safe load!! It does not use a 209A primer, but rather a Cheddite 209. Thanks to boiler28 for sharing it and some other loads too.

[boiler28]

If it was really good reloading data it would not be free. I would like them to update the lightning steel manual. I also think Rsi should update there manual to. I mean most people on this forum know to not use winchester blue box primers with Rsi loads but how many people use Rsi #99 with a winchester blue box primer and the 10ga yellow basewad remington is getting harder to find. I have tried to use winchester blue box primers and i got 80fps or more spreads. Most reloading manuals are at least 10 years old and should be updated.

I also think that a rio primer would be better in a euro hull instead of a fed209a i think i read somewhere that the rio is hotter than the fed209a

[BT Justice]

If it was really good reloading data it would not be free. I would like them to update the lightning steel manual. I also think Rsi should update there manual to. I mean most people on this forum know to not use winchester blue box primers with Rsi loads but how many people use Rsi #99 with a winchester blue box primer and the 10ga yellow basewad remington is getting harder to find. I have tried to use winchester blue box primers and i got 80fps or more spreads. Most reloading manuals are at least 10 years old and should be updated.

I also think that a rio primer would be better in a euro hull instead of a fed209a i think i read somewhere that the rio is hotter than the fed209a

The RIO primer is not hotter than the Federal 209A, it's hotter than most European primers though.
Us Pack Rats use the White Box primers

[boiler28]

Thanks i wasn't sure if the rio was hotter or colder than the fed 209a. I knew it is hotter than the cheddite primer. Maybe the rio is better than the fed 209a now that steel powder is easier to ignite than older lots. To bad there's no reloading data for it unless you use bpi reloading data which in my opinion is the same as making a load from scratch. I bet that almost every load in the status of steel that calls for buffer is over pressure.

[BT Justice]

Thanks i wasn't sure if the rio was hotter or colder than the fed 209a. I knew it is hotter than the cheddite primer. Maybe the rio is better than the fed 209a now that steel powder is easier to ignite than older lots. To bad there's no reloading data for it unless you use bpi reloading data which in my opinion is the same as making a load from scratch. I bet that almost every load in the status of steel that calls for buffer is over pressure.

FWIW and I have nothing to back this up with other than the conversation I had.
When I was developing my 16 gauge STEEL powder load back around 18 years ago it was basically uncharted territory and I couldn't get anybody to help me on it BPI told me flat out it couldn't be done, didn't listen to them. I made a call to Alliants lab and got lucky to get Ben Amonette on the phone, Ben is apparently a big fan of the 16 and was more than interested in what I was trying to do. He was nice enough to run the numbers for me and made up some loads to test using the components I had on hand, after several calls and E mails back and forth we got a load figured out that worked very well and I still use it till this day.
In one of the conversations I had with Ben he had mentioned they were having some complaints about bloopers from people with their 12 gauge 7/8 oz load data even using the Federal 209A primer, from the way I got it they were apparently going to try and make STEEL easier to ignite because of this. Never spoke anymore about it with him and never heard anything more about it, my only guess is that's what happened with STEEL somewhere along the way and why we are dealing with what we are dealing with now. Why Alliant never changed any of their load data if they did make STEEL easier to ignite is beyond me and if you call them today and ask all you will get out of them is nothing has ever changed with STEEL, so take it for what it's worth.

[swenny]

so are the tuwsbl 28 wads the equivllant to bpi's csd 7/8 wad?

[Paulinkansas]

so are the tuwsbl 28 wads the equivllant to bpi's csd 7/8 wad?

No, I think the tuwsbl 24 wad is the equivalent to the CSD 7/8 wad. BT will probably know better.

[boiler28]

TUWSBL24 same as CSD 078

TUWSBL28 same as CSD 100

TUWSBL32 same as CSD 118

TUWSBL35

TUWSBL44 same as CSD 114

[swenny]

ok , thanks boiler and pk

[Duckwyatt80]

I’m glad to see new loads. I like my loads in the 1400-1500 FPS range really. I see a few with the TUWSBL28 that are very promising.

[bassmaster624]

At least one company is redoing there data. To be honest it's not impressive. Even with 2 grains less in my older data it's still better then these. I have tried to work with the 10 ga loads. Never found one I liked.

[BT Justice]

At least one company is redoing there data. To be honest it's not impressive. Even with 2 grains less in my older data it's still better then these. I have tried to work with the 10 ga loads. Never found one I liked.

Precisions 10 gauge data leaves a lot to be desired, some people like the wads but I've never had good luck with them.
The RSI 10 gauge load data you can tweak quite a bit, one other wad I really like is the BPD 10 Tough which works really well in the Winchester 10 gauge hulls.

[Duckwyatt80]

I loaded up 2 boxes of the Remington 2 3/4' Plastic Hull with Yellow Basewad.
The load was

Load ID: 120149
Win 209
27.0 gr Longshot
TUWSBL28 wad
1 ounce steel shot
1428 fps
11,240 psi

I'll let you know how it patterns.

[Duckwyatt80]

Well I haven’t got around to patterning that load yet. I got real busy with other things. Has anyone used any of the newer Presision data with any success? Do you have any pattern pics you could drop on here. Reviving a old thread.

[jhook]

I noticed the paperwork that came with the wads for the TUWSBL35 1 1/4 OZ load in a Rem hull is not on their list. Hmmm. I liked the load and it patterned well. It was 30 Gr of steel and clocked in at 1375 FPS on my chrono. I wonder what changed with that mild load. I'll just keep using it. If it ain't broke, why fix it.

Thanks, for the info!

[muleequine]

TUWSBL24 same as CSD 078

TUWSBL28 same as CSD 100

TUWSBL32 same as CSD 118

TUWSBL35

TUWSBL44 same as CSD 114

This is only in relation as to what weight goes into each wad, not that loading data can be interchanged between the two wads, correct?