Number 10 birdshot

[Southpaw]

Interesting discussion. I am not certain how much energy it takes combined into pellet size and velocity to kill a grouse or any bird using lead shot, though I would dare say some are tougher than others. Here is the basic formula though but this mostly applies to single projectiles or bullets, but I guess also individual pellets as well:
Energy =mv^2/2.

Different pellets have different mass and loads create different velocities and in result energy. All things being equal more shot into the target has more energy. As to say maybe getting 7 or 8 number 10 shot into a grouse at 30 yards is better than getting only 5 or 6 pellets of number 8 shot into a grouse at the same distance. But obviously if shooting further out you would want larger shot that has more energy carrying capacity than smaller shot at greater distances.

There is a paradigm shift though when it comes to some shot. I think Jerry is proving this with his new Turkey loads he is trying that employs tungsten that is more dense and harder than lead shot and he has been able to demonstrate that he can get great patterns and penetration energy to kill turkeys with #9 shot at 50+ plus yards.

Also there are factors of shot deformity to consider when shooting small lead shot. This should be an interesting experiment.

[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.

[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".

[10 bore]

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.

I was more concerned with eating the small pellets. when I hit a bird I always hit it center of pattern, so with 1500 pellets that would tell me it would have 700 to 800 hits a lot of you see how I shoot, so you know I am wright
scott

[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.

[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.