S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
3 members (SKB, ithaca1, 1 invisible),
515
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,504
Posts562,172
Members14,587
|
Most Online9,918 Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155 |
....Zutz...deemed #7.5 too small to kill cleanly. Zutz apparently hasn't interviewed the grouse I've killed with #7-1/2s and #8s! Over a lifetime of hunting in some of America's best grouse country, I've only once hunted with someone who used #6s, and then only in early season when the leaves are thick. It's all a matter of opinion, of course, but most folks I know opine that #7-1/2s are plenty good to kill the lightly feathered ruffs. No disrespect intended, but just because a gun writer says something doesn't mean it's gospel. If you doubt that, go back and read Silvio Calabi's absurd panegyric in the current Shooting Sportsman magazine: "For any game requiring No. 5 shot or smaller, the 28 can equal or surpass the 12." Sometimes a writer says things just to stir up readers because it sells more copy. I would venture to guess that more grouse have fallen to #7-1/2s than ever to #7 or #6 shot.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,450 Likes: 278
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,450 Likes: 278 |
The only place an ounce and a quarter is "intense" is on the shoulder. The extra 1/4 ounce of shot on a well hit grouse or pheasant would only add another hit or two, just as likely to be in a non edible part as in an edible one. No big deal except the recoil.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 104 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 104 Likes: 1 |
Ok, it's time to weigh in. I'm someone who hunts Ruff's 98% of the time spent afield. I use 9's and can honestly say that I have enjoyed a 40+ bird /.300+ average over the last 20 years. I have had way too many 1 pellet hits bring down a bird to ever think about using anything bigger. If you're a Grouse hunter you know what a non-lethal hit looks like, you always follow up, and you use a dog. If you're not a dog person (preferably a Springer) you'd be better off hunting turkeys w/ 3.5" mags stuffed with triple B. Man, I hope it quits raining, only 3 more Saturdays left.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 41
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 41 |
WH Foster also liked 9's for the fact with the correct choke at normal grouse ranges, he had at least one pellet for every square inch or pattern spreading out about 27 inches.
Tom on that thought I wanted to try 9's but never did, sticking with 8's. I think I'll move up slowly with 8.5 shot until I feel secure that I'm still bringing down birds cleanly.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 931
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 931 |
I think the reason the author used such a small charge of very small shot, with a relatively heavy charge of black powder, in a cylinder bore gun, was to have a pattern that opened very quickly at short range. I'll second that. Seen thin logic in action many times. A person has a problem with the gun shooting too tight. He drops the shot charge, to widen the pattern by the relative overcharge of powder. It works, but there are too few holes in the target. Then the person takes a smaller shot size to increase the pellet nomber, figuiring that at the close range the load is intended for, the smaller pellet will have enough energy to do the job. And it works, too. Possibly not the best way to solve the bulletlike-pattern problem, but works. I've seen hares shot very dead with a load of 20 gramms of #7 over a powder charge normally loaded for 35 gramms, in 12 gauge, at ranges from 5 to 20 meters.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,573 Likes: 165
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,573 Likes: 165 |
I know guys that shoot 1 1/4 oz at grouse on occasion, but I'd say there are darned few times you'd need that heavy a load. And I agree with Jack that 7 1/2 is almost always going to be big enough. Lots of experienced grouse hunters--as evidenced from above posts--use smaller shot sizes (although not 10's!) successfully. In the current issue of Pointing Dog Journal magazine, Steve Smith quotes the late Gene Hill as having said: "Pheasants aside, you can shoot just about everything in North America with an ounce of number 7 1/2's." If we're talking upland birds, I'd agree with that statement.
Pheasants . . . I'd say that most wild ringnecks, shot at typical ranges, could also be taken with that same load--and an even greater majority of them could be killed with an ounce of 7's or Brit 6's. Note that I'm speaking here of ranges at which pheasants are successfully shot, not SHOT AT.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,722 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,722 Likes: 1357 |
I haven't used 1 1/4 on pheasants since I was busy mis-spending my youth!
Bought some questionable loads "on sale" back in the day.
I'm a conservative shooter, and I prefer to let those 40 yard shots go. I really like to eat birds. You can usually get a grouse up twice. A pheasant with a 40 yard start on you usually makes you hunt twice as hard once he hits the ground, after a shot. I hate losing birds.
My grouse loads look, like Larry says, a lot like my pheasant loads-1 oz of English 5s or 6s, which aren't really 5s and 6s. I have some English 7s left in the case downstairs that I bought when W. Richards was in MO, but, I keep forgeting to use them. Those are pretty good for a round of sporting clays.
I suppose if #9 and 10s would have been commonly available in the disco era (when I had to start buying my own ammunition) I would have tried them. And I would have ended up right where I am.
The only place I regularly see 9s is the range. Never have seen commercial 10s.
Some of those early season 20 yard passing shots on a grouse that someone else has flushed would convince most that 1 1/4 is too heavy-I like to eat 'em, not rinse 'em out of the plastic bag when I get home.
An argument about the merits of 6, 7 1/2 or 8 shot being used on ruffed grouse is mostly moot. They are all 'gonna work, most of the time. The cheapskate Barvarian in me is comfortable with 1 oz loads for most grouse shooting. Hate to be inefficient, you know.
Wish the season was still open. I'd find something to use... Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
Note that British #5 is essentially US #6, Brit #6 is very slightly larger than US #7 & Brit #7 is virtually identical to US #7½. This is a very useful range of shot sizes, capable of taking most any imaginable upland game, under conditions in which they should be shot. I for several years shot quite sucessfully quail, dove, woodcock, rabbit & the occasional squirrel with a sidelock J P Clabrough 28" damascus, ¼ choke in both bbls, using nothing but 1oz low pressure loads of #8 & #6. The feathers got the #8s & the fur the #6s. I could most likely have made every shot using nothing but #7 or even #7½ equally as well.
Miller/TN I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155 |
Note that I'm speaking here of ranges at which pheasants are successfully shot, not SHOT AT. An important distinction, Larry, for any wild bird - and one I think more hunters should make. I don't take 40+ yard shots at grouse any more because I seldom hit them at that distance and - even with a dog - had a harder time finding them. Better to pass up the shot and try for a second flush. Shooting 7/8oz. #8s on grouse, and 1oz. #6s on pheasant in a 20ga. choked Cyl and open Mod, I figure 30-35 yards is my max for clean kills. Any shot beyond that is just for spite.
|
|
|
|
|