• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Colonial Goose Shot

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Capt. Jas.

58 Cal.
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Messages
3,049
Reaction score
1,352
I have found documention that stated the 1750's Virginia colonial militia and rangers on the frontier preferred "large goose shot" to one round ball projectile for encountering the enemy.
Do you think that their large goose shot would have been like our BB size pellet or a small size modern buckshot?

I have posted this on the smoothbore site as I have a 20 ga. that I want to try to pattern some large shot out of. I found an old bag of "7 1/2 buckshot" which mics out to be .27 which is what we know would class as no. 2 buckshot. What load should I try with this shot in the 20 bore as far as powder, amount of shot, wads, etc? I am not expecting super and realistic hunting patterns out of the 20 but just curious as to what it does.
The source and text is cited below.

From the Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Va., February 1st, 1757.

"His honor (Governor) was pleased likewise to lay before the board two letters from Colo. Read dated 24th of january (1757) acknowledging in his first the receipt of his Honor's letter by Capt. Voss, and signifying that he has writ to Mr. Calloway in Bedford to know what arms and ammunition he has, that he had not yet received any account from him and was apprehensive of a bad one in regard to the powder and ball from the extravagant use made of it by the several companies, that 100 guns ordered him, he had supplied as directed Colo. Fontaine with 40 , that Captain Hogg in behalf of Stalnaker had 11 so that only 49 remained, that he has 200 which were last sent, about 600 pounds of powder, but few musket balls and no flints. , desires a supply of 1000 pounds of ball, and 1000 flints to be forwarded by Mr. James Deans, merchant in Chesterfield -he believes it will be some time in March before the volunteers can be ready to go out- He thinks every man should have a wallet of oznabrigs to carry his provisions in when they leave their horses at the passes of the mountains, and two pair of mockasheens- that blankets would be wanted and clasp knives, thread for the linen, and woolen bags for transporting the powder when taken from the wagons....-that after the meeting for the choice of officers, he shall instantly send to his Honor for commissions-enclosing the account of the money he received by his Honor's warrant from the treasurer, and how it has been applied, with an estimate of cash wanting to pay the people employed by him to kill and cure the provisions, also to pay the men and officers of Lunenburg who were out on duty till discharged in November, and accounts of the like nature from[url] Bedford..........In[/url] his second letter he desires that a sufficient quanity of large goose-shot may be sent, which is judged preferable to bullets, and proposes as an encouragement to the people in Augusta, Bedford and Halifax who are esteemed the best woodsmen to engage as volunteers in the association that two or three companies of the militia of some of the adjacent counties be sent to garrison the three forts in Augusta during the time the associators shall be out on the expedition......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The buck load I use in both of my 20 guage smoothbores is 65 to 80 grains of 3fffg Goex under 8 or 9 .30 caliber balls. I use shotgun cards and wads with this load. I don't hunt with this, but it is devastating load on many woods walk targets.

Randy hedden
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have seen many references to goose, large goose, duck, swan , bustard and other small cast shot but have not seen anything to definitely nail down the corresponding size of each, the swan/lrg. goose is usually thought to be around .25 give or take.
 
#4 buck is .24. You can buy that by the bag to save money. A common 12 gauge police load is I think 24 pellets of #4 buck. You could probably get away with 15 or 16 in a .20 gauge as a really effective load.
Ohio Rusty
 
We have references and charts for todays shot size, it was the 18th century sizes that we are not certain of when they speak of goose, swan or duck shot. and the French, German English and Dutch may have all been different.
 
I'm commenting in an area that I really know very little about,but it's my understanding that swanshot are not round like common buckshot.Rather,these are teardrop shaped.

In the Creek Indian deer skin trade with Colonial merchants and factors,the English Crown prohibited swanshot from being traded to the Indians because these projectiles ripped large holes in deer hides reducing their value to English leather workers. Could it be that swanshot are more deadly than regular buckshot? :hmm:.
 
Original "swan shot" was another version of poured shot and was tear-drop shaped. It probably had ballistic properties of cubes or worse. Before 1769, all shot was eithr cast or poured. The cast shot usually varied from about .247" to .450". Smaller "Rupert" shot was lead fluxed with arsenic and poured into a large brass colander-like pan with holes punched or drilled in the bottom. A fire was started to heat the colander and the molten lead poured into the coals and ran out the bottom to dropinto a pan of water. Since the drop wasn't far enough to permit surface tension, the resultant shot was slightly ovoid with a flat dimple flattened side. This shot usually is found in sizes from .217" to .078" and was screened into various sizes for sale or trade. This type shot was called "Rupert" shot since Prince Rupert left an account of it's manufacture in 1665.

The shot recovered at Fort Michilimackinac is shown in a couple sources with cast shot from gang molds running from .350" to .471" and poured "Rupert"shot running from .087" to .215".

Some years ago Lyman did some research and their take was that "swan shot" from post 1769 ran about .020" in diameter and is what is called "T" size shot in modern times. If you want some shot of that size, you might try Ballistic Products. Good luck.
 
Wes-Tex,

Thank you for your reply on this! It is responses like yours that make this website such a valuable scource for collecting intelligence :hatsoff:.
 
Wes I think you will find that swan shot has always been a cast shot just like buck shot only smaller, the shot with a tail being swan shot is just that a ....tale, Hmilton shows a mould that was used for making swan shot and several gun history students have chimned in on this "tail" myth over the last several years on various forums. I believe there is some info in the archives here on this topic.
 
I believe it was Hamilton that listed swan shot as .025, or .027 cast balls. The tear drop shaped "swan droppings" is somone's idea of what MIGHT have been made on the frontier to provide a swan size shot.

There is supposed to be some documentation on the use of "swan droppings", but I haven't seen it.
J.D.
 
Agreed JD, there is also a 17th century mould that was found that cast the .25 balls +/- which was condidered to be goose or swan shot, the things with the tails were at best a poor attempt to make shot and the rest .....is NOT histoty (VBG)
 
Yeah, the "swan shot" thing has a life of it's own. Somewhere I once saw a photo that was suppose to be of actual excavated shot of this type but it's been years ago and I just can't recall it's original source. I've also seen some modern photos of "swan shot" made by some shooters to test. That photo may have been posted here some time back but I haven't looked for it. Reguardless of when or where, shot shaped like an exclamation mark can't be aerodynamic in any way. The old photo showed shot that looked more like a bowling pin than the latest photo. I just don't know the origin of this.
 
Wes/Tex said:
Reguardless of when or where, shot shaped like an exclamation mark can't be aerodynamic in any way.

I suspect it was not ment to be aerodynamic, I believe it was designed to open the shot cloud to get the maximum pattern width at any givin distance...
 
I do not think there was any design or thought envolved at all, it was probably just a bad attempt to make small shot with out the proper mould ....if and when it actuall happened. shot of that size could probably be made by the Rupert process and there would be no tadpole appearance, modern suppliers and some writers have taken this tailed swan shot thing and given it much more valididty than can be supported with known fact.
 
my 20 ga buckshot load is as follows:

70 gr goex 2f

wadding

paper shot cup loaded with 20 #3 buckshot pellets buffered with jiffy cornbread mix

wadding

In the shot cup I put 5 layers of 4 pellets sandwiched between the cornbread mix.

This load will put about 12 pellets in a deer's kill zone at 25 yards.

I have tried shooting buckshot by loding loose in the barrel and I have tried shot cups without buffer. Neither of these combinations produced a good pattern.

Hope this helps!

And to all on the forum I wish you a very Merry Christmas!
 
Swan droppings were supposedly poured from a ladle, drop by drop, to make a form of primitive swan, goose, or buck shot when none was available.

I have experimented with pouring moulten lead through a sieve made of a tin can held about 6" off a pan of water. Most of the shot came out a little larger than #4 bird shot, and is sure death on small game.

Patterns are not consistent, but it appears to be devastating to small game. I suspect that a one and a half ounce load of this size of swan droppings fired into a man, or large game, at close range, would behave similarly to the Flechetts used in Vietnam.

It was said that the only thing a doctor could do for someone hit by flechettes was to sign the death certificate.
J.D.
 
If folks want to call the funny shaped stuff swan drops or swan t&^rds that's fine, I just wish they would quit trying to change the original definition and method of manufacture for swan shot....
 
I agree. It's too confusing to those who are new to the sport and haven't done the research. Most people who refer to swan drops as swan shot do it simply because they don't know there IS a difference.

IMHO, Those of us who DO know the difference have the responsibility to educate those who don't.

J.D.
 
IMHO, Those of us who DO know the difference have the responsibility to educate those who don't.

I think a picture of each will go a long way in understanding, does anyone have such an image?
 
Back
Top