Jim Gordon Posted 28 November , 2003 Share Posted 28 November , 2003 Does anyone know if the .003" SMLE cartdrige was compatible to the Ross Rifle Mk III ? Regards Jim Gordon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 28 November , 2003 Share Posted 28 November , 2003 Jim, Yes the Ross used the same .303 Cartridge. However, I've read that some of the Ross's jamming problems were blamed on British manufactured rounds being out of tolerance in comparison to Canadian made rounds. Supposedly the Ross was sensitive and needed ammunition made to very close tolerances. Strikes me as an arguement meant to deflect blame away from the weapon. Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 28 November , 2003 Share Posted 28 November , 2003 You are right. About 2 years ago Len Shurtleff had a Stand To! article about this miserable weapon Sam Hughes defended well past the point of reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Gordon Posted 28 November , 2003 Author Share Posted 28 November , 2003 Joe & Paul Thank you for information and apologies for the typo of the calibre. It is several years ago since I was made aware of the controversy over the Ross. I was armed with the brute when I was a 16 year old Private in the British Home Guard. Nobody told us about the design defect that allowed the bolt to be wrongly fitted into the breech chamber and that a cursory inspection would not reveal the mistake. If fired the bolt would come backwards with devastating effect. I was a bit taken aback when I learned this. Were those weapons supplied to the British modified to rectify this defect ? Regards Jim Gordon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordac Posted 1 December , 2003 Share Posted 1 December , 2003 If fired the bolt would come backwards with devastating effect. I was a bit taken aback when I learned this. Hi Jim: From 'Welcome To Flanders Fields' page 4: "The earliest recorded grievance was filed in February 1906 by the commissioner of the RNWMP, and many more were registered in subsequence weeks and months. After a marksman was injured in the eye by a bolt flying back, the mounted police, cited "many week points... in the design and manufacture" withdrew the Ross rifle from service in the fall of 1906." I have a relative who uses a Ross rifle in open-sight shooting competition. The rife originally was used on the Western Front and was returned to the Dominion Armory for testing in 1916. Brian swears the Ross is a perfect weapon, but the d**n thing needs to be babied. As Paul mentioned, the Ross rifle was Sir Sam's choice for the CEF, which he tenaciously defended. It cost Edwin Alderson his job when he complained to Hughes about the rifle's poor performance in the field. In the end, the Ross also claimed Sir Sam as a victim. Garth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Parker Posted 2 December , 2003 Share Posted 2 December , 2003 The Ross rifle in its own right was a good weapon and continued to be used throughout the First World War by snipers. It was far more accurate than the SMLE. The Bolt action was not dis-similar to the '14 Pattern Enfield. The problem with the Ross was its complicated bolt, it was too refined for the conditions of trench warfare, and its tendancy to jam when British made cartridges were used. Jim As far as I know no alterations were made to the bolt when it was reissued to Home Guard and other such units in WW2. I have a Ross and its a pig to reassemble the bolt, it is so easy to insert it incorrectly. Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Gordon Posted 6 December , 2003 Author Share Posted 6 December , 2003 Geoff You may be interested in an incident I witnessed in 1942. Our Range, at that time, consisted of a cut-out lifesize figure of a German soldier mounted on a raft moored about 150 yards from a jetty. A new member had been instructed to select a rifle from the spares rack in our hut which he did and I happened to be standing behind him when he fired from the prone position at the Range. The result was catstrophic. The bullet literally crawled out of the muzzle and slowly "arced" its way to the sea into which it dropped about 20 yards away. The lad's back arched skywards with the recoil and he was hauled away. I never saw him again. At the time the cause was put down to non-cleaning of the weapon and I must say that I agreed then but on hearing of the dislike of the CEF for their own weapon it does make you wonder. Regards Jim Gordon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Parker Posted 8 December , 2003 Share Posted 8 December , 2003 Jim Interesting story. sounds to me like an incorrectly fitted bolt. Funny enough until recently the only reference I had to enable me to strip and reassemble my Ross was a Home Guard training manual on small arms. The Ross began life as a hunting rilfe, so developing and mass producing a Military version was not a very good idea, not squaddie proof. I've never actually seen a photograph of the Home Guard issued with the Ross, nearly always the Enfield, Pattern 14 or 17, so I assume it was not common. Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now