... not much plutonium in it, which should provide a hint.
The trick with plutonium is that because it's a fast neutron emitter, it usually requires implosion. In other words, a sub-critical mass is reduced in size (and cross-section) by a controlled explosion--it's squeezed into a smaller and smaller ball in a matter of microseconds until it reaches criticality (when neutron production and capture are sufficient for a chain reaction).
So, it's possible to start with a smaller sub-critical amount and still get it to reach criticality by imploding it into an even smaller ball, and by using what's known as a reflector with very high neutron reflectivity.
I was hoping you'd find the quote about one of Taylor's last designs which was informally known as the "PP Shot," short for "puny plutonium." That was, at the time, the smallest successful nuclear weapon, and the PP in the name was meant to imply that the plutonium core was little bigger than a BB.
Gun-type bombs work differently, and plutonium isn't really suitable for them--in the time it takes to bring the two subcritical halves together, because of those fast neutrons--too many neutrons escape to bring the core to full criticality. (That said, Taylor, or his successors, did manage to combine aspects of both implosion and gun-type weapons using plutonium, and these were sometimes used in artillery shells--the method was known as linear implosion:
This artillery shell had a yield of 72 tons. So, it is possible to make quite small plutonium weapons.
Cheers.