Number 10 birdshot

[Heff]

I was told by an old timer long ago, the small shot (9, 10 &12) was never intended for penetration, but rather for knock down capibility on smaller sized birds. Like swatting them with a lead racket. Even at closer ranges you would not destroy or make a bird inedible like a load of 6's or even 7 1/2 would. I know I had had great success with the RST woodcock loads.

[High Brass]

I shot quite a few grouse back when I had my Gordon Setter, Kate. I didn't like #8s, and finally settles on 7 1/2 shot in the right cylinder barrel and 6s in the modified left barrel of my 16 ga. Fox. You guys will have to do a lot of convincing to get me to use 10 shot.

[Double Lab]

I have to agree with Scott and George on this one. With no disrespect to the previous posters, we all have our own theories on what loads, chokes, barrel lengths work for the chosen game. I just believe that 7 1/2's will cleanly dispatch any upland bird if the load is properly placed. By properly placed I mean between the tip of the beak and the leading edge of the wings, aka the head. Even if you are a little behind in your lead you will break a wing. I won't bore you with the numbers but pellet energy is what kills- not dense patterns of what amounts to lead dust. One or two 7 1/2's have that energy.

[todd allen]

Originally Posted by Chad Hefflinger

I was told by an old timer long ago, the small shot (9, 10 &12) was never intended for penetration, but rather for knock down capibility on smaller sized birds. Like swatting them with a lead racket. Even at closer ranges you would not destroy or make a bird inedible like a load of 6's or even 7 1/2 would. I know I had had great success with the RST woodcock loads.

Well, without getting into a spoiler alert, we suspect that traditional birdshot penetration is not what is bringing these birds to bag. We will conduct the tests, and get some answers.
There is a formula here, but there are also some limits to the formula,, based on physics.

[Harold Pickens]

My opinion is that 10 shot has no business being used for upland game birds--for the same reason, you can kill a deer with a 22 if you shoot it in the right place, but most will just run away and die somewhere else. Ever see a grouse juke sideways at your shot and then just keep flying on? It wasn't dodging your shot stream, you just put some BB's in it, and it probably wont survive. Follow those birds up, and you will get a weak flush, or the dog may bring it back.
I don't care much for 9's either, too many BB's in the meat. I'm ok with 8's, but 7's or 7 1/2's kill cleaner, the bird deserves at least that consideration.
Wasn't it Elmer Keith who said "Use enough gun".

[Tom Flanigan]

The old grouse gunners that I have been told about and known knew nothing of ballistics, penetration or anything technical. They didn’t use small shot for pattern density but in an effort to get some shot through very thick cover to the bird. That is all there was to it. Remember, their birds were not in relatively open coverts. They were snap shooting at often nothing more than a blur of a bird that would be gone in a few short seconds.

Not all grouse hunting involves snap shooting at distances better measured in feet rather than yards. I believe that the grouse hunting I did in Saskatchewan might be typical of many areas of the country where grouse are hunted, even in the northeast. Longer shots and a lot of walking for each shot. Just the opposite of my Pawling coverts where the birds are concentrated in relatively small areas due to especially thick cover and abundant feed which equates to bayberries, fox grapes and other types of berries.

I have never used 10’s but only because I couldn’t buy the shot. If I could have, I would have loaded 10’s and been happy to do so. So I can’t attest to the average number of shot in the body of a bird shot with those loads. But I can tell you categorically, from hundreds brought to bag since I was 13, that the average number of #9 shot in the body of my birds was three, sometimes four and rarely more than that.

I can only speak from the perspective of my own experience and those of the old time grouse hunters I have known. Others gunning other types of grouse coverts may have different experiences and will tend to gravitate to what works for them.

I can also in all honesty and good conscience, say that I have lost relatively few birds that carried shot and flown on to be lost. My pockets of covert are concentrated and I scour them week after week. I don’t hunt birds without a dog. If I was wounding a number of birds, I am confident I would see evidence of it.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I just know what I have experienced and what worked for me and those who came before me. This has been a great discussion and I enjoyed all of the input.

[todd allen]

Some #10 shot is on the way. The answers are also on the way.

[James L. Martin]

I find this thread very interesting, for what's it worth I have hunted grouse and woodcock for over 50 years, I have killed over 500 grouse ,most in New York. I have tried 9,8, 71/2,7,6,5 shot .I have settled on 71/2 and 6. Late season just #6 shot. I believe you lose and wound birds with very small shot. I have used #10 shot in RST shells for woodcock and they worked good but they were close shots. I will be waiting the results of the tests on #10's.

[Phil C]

The bird you are hunting and the situation dictates what a person uses. I dont like losing birds and I like eating them. I have been blessed to have lived my whole life were we have 4 1/2 months of quail hunting per year and I love to hunt.
I use what works for me. Im guessing each of us are using what works best in our own situations.
I dont shoot 9’s for every situation, but anyone the doubts the effectiveness needs to spend a day behind some good pointers out here in the grassy and oak covered hills.
My findings are like Tom mentions above. Very few pellets in the breast. Then again I shoot 90% of my pointed birds from behind and varing angles of the birds going away. Lots of close fleeting shots. I can't tell you the last time I lost a bird due to it being shot up.
The main factor in choosing 9’s over 6 or 7 1/2” is less meat damage while effective killing at closer ranges.

[Gary Laudermilch]

This has been an interesting thread and will continue to be so.

I've been hunting grouse for 50 years or more and have taken my share. To this day I examine every bird harvested for pellet performance as I have for years been somewhat of a student of shotgun terminal ballistics. I have my opinions on shot size, choke, and shot payload that I feel is appropriate for grouse.

I have heard numerous times over the years that grouse are easy to bring down. I could recount many, many events over the years that refute this claim. I'll cite but one illustrious example. I hunt a cover we now call the "headless grouse". Before it received this moniker my son and I were hunting it with my two setters. Dogs on point and son walks in for the flush. Bird gets up and I see it heading my way so I turn around to take it going away but my son shoots before it gets to me. Bird passes overhead but is flying oddly and making a get away but I did not shoot. Bird flies about 50-60 yards and comes to ground. It is completely missing it's head, the result of my son's 10 yd. shot. This is a weird example of grouse tenacity and is extreme, I admit. However, I could spend a day relating less dramatic examples of grouse that should have come down and did not.

So, my one word of wisdom is "Respect the Bird" as they are too precious to loose and worth far more alive than lost.