Armory Sponsor
Posted: 3/26/2012 12:42:25 PM EDT
|
for some reason......I want one, I think after reading a rifleman went to war, I'm all wound up on one
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=278783475 this one has been on gunbroker forever. |
|
I have a 1918 made Ross MkIII.
Really interesting rifles but I would chuck it in a deeep hole in a Heartbeat for a No1MkIII or P14 if I had to use one in WW1 and was Canadian. One of the few rifles I can think of that was made worse during each succesive Mk. By the MkIII it was a heavy cumbersome rifle with a very finicky straight pull action with a magazine system that sucks with a rimmed 303.. |
|
If I recall correctly it was also very easy to assemble the bolt assembly incorrectly, causing the bolt to more or less punch a hole through the shooter's head upon firing the rifle.
I think they were otherwise fairly well-built firearms, but tolerances were apparently held way too tight for a battle rifle, causing tons of malfunctions in dirt, mud and sand, especially when they got hot. (Just some stuff I recall reading about them; no personal experience whatsoever. In fact, I've never even seen one that I can recall...) |
|
The latest issue of Military Heritage had a very good article on the Ross rifle. Canada started purchasing them because England could not initially supply them with Enfield rifles. This was during modernization in the early 1900's. During testing the rifle failed miserably but stubbornness on the part of one man kept them in the running. Some modifications were made, but they were known as dogs even before WWI started. They are however a very accurate rifle made to tight specs. They were sort of the early M16's of their day. They do not like dirt.
As mentioned above if you put the bolt together wrong you were in a world of hurt if you survived the mishap. In 1916 the idiot, who was still insisting that it was the "finest military rifle in the world" was finally removed from office and the Canadian military finally officially converted to the Enfield. Even before that British General Haig ordered that Enfields be supplied to all Canadian units on the front. They continued to serve in a sniper capacity throughout the war. Something that they were very good at. Accuracy was never an issue with the rifle. Vintage military rifle matches still being won by people using them. |
|
As mentioned they are an accurate rifle and well suited to historic disciplines, although the capacity can be a problem since most use Enfields with 10rnd magazines.
I don't own one, but I have shot against them and handled them. One of my friends shoots one competitively and does fairly well with it. He actually used the No.4 Lee Enfield when he was an infantryman during the 1950's - I don't know why he chose a Ross rather than his old service rifle, but it must say something positive about the Ross. Very rare rifle in the UK, probably worth $1000+ for a nice one. It is so uncommon I don't even know of many collectors with one. Maybe they are much more common in America? |
|
Quoted:
As mentioned they are an accurate rifle and well suited to historic disciplines, although the capacity can be a problem since most use Enfields with 10rnd magazines. I don't own one, but I have shot against them and handled them. One of my friends shoots one competitively and does fairly well with it. He actually used the No.4 Lee Enfield when he was an infantryman during the 1950's - I don't know why he chose a Ross rather than his old service rifle, but it must say something positive about the Ross. Very rare rifle in the UK, probably worth $1000+ for a nice one. It is so uncommon I don't even know of many collectors with one. Maybe they are much more common in America? I doubt they are very common ANYWHERE. Anybody have any idea how many were manufactured? |
Armory Sponsor