Swan Shot

[J.D.]

Nope, you'r wrong Pard. otherwise, how to you explain the Giraffe shot? :wink:

Can't explain giraffe shot. Don't know a thing about history of South Africa. I do know a LOT about Amercian history and have done enough research to write a book.

My research, from mulitple sources, shows swan shot to be cast round shot of about 27 caliber.

That shot was cast in a mould, not dropped, dripped, or otherwise poured, other than into the mould.

This type of poured or dripped shot was first called swan droppings, due to its resemblance to swan droppings, aka swan excrement. This name, apparently, quickly became confused with the 18th century cast swan shot.

Again, I have not seen any documentation to suggest that anyone in the 18th century has ever made shot in this way. There are accounts of shot being cut from flattened balls, but not from dripping lead into water.

Someone, at some time, may have made shot by dripping lead into water to produce tear drop shaped, "C" or "j" shaped shot. However, to my knowledge, no reference of it has been found.
J.D.

 

[tg]

Good post JD, correct as usuall, but for some reason the facts about swan shot just don't want to stick in the ML community, probably to many years of incorrect repitition of false info.

 

[paulvallandigham]

If your dimensions are correct, swan shot, at .27" would be about #3 buck shot today. Its illegal to use buck shot to shoot waterfowl under international treaties signed by the USA, Mexico, and Canada. So, even if we had it, we could not legally use it to hunt. :hmm: :surrender:

 

[J.D.]

Thanks tg. My first experience with dripped "swan droppings" was a demonstration by Gerry Barker at Manskers about 15 years ago. I don't know where he got the idea, or if he had some documentation for drip shot. It's been so long ago that I can't remember the details.

I do know that I have searched for documentation with no luck at all.

Paul, I doubt that the early hunters had any scruples about violating international hunting regs. :blah: :rotf:
J.D.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Well, since those regulations didn't come into being until the 1900s(Lacey Act), I don't think they had to much to lose sleep over, either. :grin:

 

[bnail]

Nope, you'r wrong Pard. otherwise, how to you explain the Giraffe shot? :wink:

Can't explain giraffe shot. Don't know a thing about history of South Africa. I do know a LOT about Amercian history and have done enough research to write a book. . .

Come on folks, get a sense of humor! I thoght the "Giraffe" remark was suitably obsurd enough to not be taken seriously. Besides, I don't think any resonable student of the period accepts these myths anymore. It's just amusing to me how some folks jump when these things are still mentioned.
If I'm not mistaken, drop shot didn't really take off until the proliferation of Shot towers which was what, late 18th, early 19th century? Regardless. here's a link that,IIRC,illustrates both types of shot, and take note of the absence of any "neck" or "Tail." Queen Anne's Revenge

 

[Runner]

In a realistic view, both have their place. The only thing being argued is the name. If you take a screen box and dump lead thru the screen, the lead will start to solidify on the screen and the droplets will get smaller and smaller as the holes get smaller. Somewhere during that process, shot with a tail will be formed and as the right size droplets are formed for the amount of drop used, almost round shot will be formed also. The almost perfect shot is bagged for things like turkeys that need tight long range patterns. The acceptable shot with a tail is bagged for uses that don't require as dense a pattern. The junk gets melted again while the screen is placed over the fire so the lead will melt off. Then you do it again. What you call it is your business. The lead from the screen will be on the bottom of the fire pit in chunks to be collected the next day.
I don't know about historical accuracy. I see lots of people making wild claims about how capable the old stuff is, and then several posts later, the same guys are putting down others for choosing modern guns because they are too easy!
The truth is that a long barreled gun does not swing as easy as a short barreled gun. It does not carry thru the woods and the brush as well either. If hunting is your goal without historic concerns, the 30 to 36 inch barrels are much better wing guns. If you want the challenge of using historic flintlock fowlers from before the shorter barreled "shotguns" were popular, then you need a long barrel for that one reason alone. If you want to cook great dove recipes to share with your partner in the evening, get the 30 to 36 inch gun!

 

[Jeffrey Hecht]

Nope, you'r wrong Pard. otherwise, how to you explain the Giraffe shot? :wink:

Can't explain giraffe shot. Don't know a thing about history of South Africa. I do know a LOT about Amercian history and have done enough research to write a book. . .

Come on folks, get a sense of humor! I thoght the "Giraffe" remark was suitably obsurd enough to not be taken seriously. Besides, I don't think any resonable student of the period accepts these myths anymore. It's just amusing to me how some folks jump when these things are still mentioned.
If I'm not mistaken, drop shot didn't really take off until the proliferation of Shot towers which was what, late 18th, early 19th century? Regardless. here's a link that,IIRC,illustrates both types of shot, and take note of the absence of any "neck" or "Tail." Queen Anne's Revenge

I found a button today!

 

[bnail]

Nope, you'r wrong Pard. otherwise, how to you explain the Giraffe shot? :wink:

Can't explain giraffe shot. Don't know a thing about history of South Africa. I do know a LOT about Amercian history and have done enough research to write a book. . .

Come on folks, get a sense of humor! I thoght the "Giraffe" remark was suitably obsurd enough to not be taken seriously. Besides, I don't think any resonable student of the period accepts these myths anymore. It's just amusing to me how some folks jump when these things are still mentioned.
If I'm not mistaken, drop shot didn't really take off until the proliferation of Shot towers which was what, late 18th, early 19th century? Regardless. here's a link that,IIRC,illustrates both types of shot, and take note of the absence of any "neck" or "Tail." Queen Anne's Revenge

I found a button today!

I gaurentee I know what kind it was too. . . it was a "Drop" Button! :rotf:

 

[Russianblood]

Here's the secret to making Rupert shot without a tail:

Used to make shot. Dated mid 16th through 18th century. German Prince Rupert wrote: "...long as you observe the right temper of the heat, the lead will constantly drop into very round shot, without so much as one with a tail in as many pounds ... fall to be round and without tail, there is Auripigmentum (arsenic trisulphide) enough put in and the temper of the heat is right."
[url] http://goosebay-workshops.com/THE-SHIP-S-STORE[/url]

 

[Rod Lassey]

I have seen a couple of frontier made shot droppers, made of wood with piece of perforated sheet metal inserted into the block. One of them is in the Museum of the Fur Trade.

By the way, here are some common fur trade shot sizes:
Swan shot .28"
Beaver shot .21
Small buck .35
Large buck .38