Lee-Enfieild Firing Pin
- Thread starter sorifern
- Start date
When you lift the Bolt Handle, the Cocking Piece rides up a little RAMP, CAMMING the Striker (Firing Pin) backwards just enough that it doesn't protrude from the face of the Bolt Head.
This is so that, when you slap the Bolt shut on a live round, the Firing Pin does not rest against the live Primer. Thus, there is NO chance of setting a round off before it is safely ALL THE WAY into the Chamber and the Bolt securely LOCKED. The Cocking Piece is held back by the Sear, which drops out of contact when you press the Trigger, allowing Firing Pin and Cocking Piece to snap forward as an assembly, hitting and denting the Primer and setting the thing off.
If your Firing Pin protrudes from the Bolt Face when the action is open, then you have a very unsafe condition and your rifle REALLY needs to go to the Armourer.
BTW, if you work the Bolt carefully and observe very closely, you will see that there are TWO Camming Actions present as you open the action of a Lee Rifle. The first is the Camming Action which retracts the Firing Pin (as above), the SECOND is the action which cams the Bolt Body backward about 1/8 of an inch as the Bolt is unlocked. This camming action gives you your PRIMARY EXTRACTION, loosening the fired cartridge in the Chamber and pulling it backward out of contact with the Chamber Walls. This action makes it much easier and much faster to operate the rifle. Again, if THIS action is missing, you have a very serious problem.
Fortunately, the LEE Rifle is an absolute MASTERPIECE of design. It is simpler than any other major design of Battle Rifle, yet it has a full range of safety features designed right into it and made operational by the SHAPES of the major working parts. It is simple to operate, LOOKS very simple to make, but it is not: it is an absolute sunnuvvabish to MAKE. The British put up with that aspect of the design because it was so wonderfully flaw-free IN USE. For one example, the Safety can be wrecked, the entire Safety Mechanism can fall off..... and you still have a SAFE Rifle if you use it properly...... because the MOST important safety features are inherent in the basic DESIGN of the mechanism.
You have just noticed one of them.
This is so that, when you slap the Bolt shut on a live round, the Firing Pin does not rest against the live Primer. Thus, there is NO chance of setting a round off before it is safely ALL THE WAY into the Chamber and the Bolt securely LOCKED. The Cocking Piece is held back by the Sear, which drops out of contact when you press the Trigger, allowing Firing Pin and Cocking Piece to snap forward as an assembly, hitting and denting the Primer and setting the thing off.
If your Firing Pin protrudes from the Bolt Face when the action is open, then you have a very unsafe condition and your rifle REALLY needs to go to the Armourer.
BTW, if you work the Bolt carefully and observe very closely, you will see that there are TWO Camming Actions present as you open the action of a Lee Rifle. The first is the Camming Action which retracts the Firing Pin (as above), the SECOND is the action which cams the Bolt Body backward about 1/8 of an inch as the Bolt is unlocked. This camming action gives you your PRIMARY EXTRACTION, loosening the fired cartridge in the Chamber and pulling it backward out of contact with the Chamber Walls. This action makes it much easier and much faster to operate the rifle. Again, if THIS action is missing, you have a very serious problem.
Fortunately, the LEE Rifle is an absolute MASTERPIECE of design. It is simpler than any other major design of Battle Rifle, yet it has a full range of safety features designed right into it and made operational by the SHAPES of the major working parts. It is simple to operate, LOOKS very simple to make, but it is not: it is an absolute sunnuvvabish to MAKE. The British put up with that aspect of the design because it was so wonderfully flaw-free IN USE. For one example, the Safety can be wrecked, the entire Safety Mechanism can fall off..... and you still have a SAFE Rifle if you use it properly...... because the MOST important safety features are inherent in the basic DESIGN of the mechanism.
You have just noticed one of them.
Last edited:
TargetAcquired
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
I wish they were still making these same actions, but with slightly tighter tolerances for us modern folk that don't shoot from muddy trenches. I have a half dozen of them (or 6, depending on how you view life) and they are all superb shooters, but it would be nice to not worry about marrying brass to a certain rifle and all that other stuff.
thanks for the info. I guess I never really thought about the fact that having the firing pin protrude from the bolt would be a bad thing. And I have to agree with you TargetAcquired, these things are built to last. The simplicity and elegance of the machine, coupled with the efficiency and legendary reliability enable the Lee- Enfield to remain relevant today. Love the action so much that there is really no other rifle I want. When I graduate perhaps I will look for a DCRA conversion.
TargetAcquired
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
lol, oooook.
- Location
- Manitoulin Island
If you had a Ross rifle that did NOT have an enlarged chamber, maybe one of the commercial ones, that might be true, however if you have a tight reload to start with and it expands even more in firing, your chances of getting it out are better in the LE with the camming extraction. Both of them have a better extractor contact than say a Remington 700 which can pull through the rim. Also the bolt handle can come un-soldered from the bolt. I have had both happen. It is REALLY embarrassing when you knock down an animal and try to work the bolt for a second shot only to have this happen.
NOT all of them.
My Grandfather was a Sniper with 54th Battalion ("The Kootenay Regiment", before it was renamed). He told me that he carried TWO rifles: a "Short Lee-Enfield" for what he called "quick work"..... and a Ross for long-range shooting. The only shot he ever talked about was with the Ross: a total-darkness shot straight down the sights of a Jerry sniper who was shooting through a loophole. One round from the Ross..... and no more sniping in their sector for quite some time. The sniper already had scored on several of our men.
I have written in this forum several times already of my conversations with two men who used the Ross Rifle Mark III during the Gas Attack at St. Julien in the Second Battle of Ypres. These men were L/Cpl Robert Courtice and Pte. Alex McBain, both serving with "A" Coy, 8th Battalion (the "Little Black Devils", now the Royal Winnipeg Rifles. "A" Company was the single Reserve Company of 8th Battalion on that day (99 years ago TODAY). Jerry put through the Gas (chlorine) and followed it by trying to pour a DIVISION through the gap in the Line. The French North African troops, having NO gas protection at all, broke and ran; the ones who stood their ground (and there were too many of them) choked to death in the green mist.
"A" Company ran up THROUGH the gas. Their only protection was urine-soaked cloths over their faces. L/Cpl Courtice used his field dressing, Pte. McBain used a sock. When they closed with the advancing German troops, what followed was the single most horrific rifle engagement in the annals of warfare. Each man in "A" Company was carrying 120 or 180 rounds of .303" Ball ammunition, Mark VII. Casualties were VERY heavy. The Ross Rifles were fired until they were TOO HOT TO TOUCH TO RELOAD, whereupon they were put to one side and a rifle from a casualty taken up and put into action. When the SECOND rifle was TOO HOT TO TOUCH TO RELOAD, it was put down the the men reverted to their original, now-cooled, rifles and continued the fight.
In this way, the men expended their ammunition..... and then re-ammunitioned from casualties and continued the battle.
BOTH men told me expressly that, despite this Hellish treatment, they had NO TROUBLE WHATSOEVER with the Ross Rifles.
Thinking on the vast quantity of ammunition which was expended, I (rather foolishly) asked Cpl. Courtice at what ranges they were shooting. A very old man, he blinked his eyes, looked at the floor and said, very quietly, "Too close to miss....".
Pte. McBain was wounded in the battle, kept on fighting and was invalided home to Brandon. His trip home, by the traditional Available Military Transport, took him a year and over 20,000 miles. Cpl. Courtice, unwounded at Second Ypres, was blown up by a 90-pounder only a couple of weeks later, at a place called GIVENCHY. He was the only survivor of the 12 men in his bay. When I knew him, he still had chunks of steel working their way out of his face and his brain; he had a little match-box in which he kept all the chunks of iron which had worked their way out over the years. Medical science at that time just was not equipped for what, even today, would be extremely risky brain surgery.
Rosses, even chopped and Bubba'd Mark III Rosses, can be quite shockingly accurate. If the Chamber has not been abused, brass comes out so perfect that it can be re-used almost indefinitely and reloaded with only a minor neck-sizing.
Hope this helps.
I'm going to sit quietly for a short while and remember my friends, Private Soldier Alex McBain and Lance-Corporal Robert Courtice of the 8th Battalion of the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
I would ask YOU to think of them, also...... and of all the others, so many of whom did not come home.
My Grandfather was a Sniper with 54th Battalion ("The Kootenay Regiment", before it was renamed). He told me that he carried TWO rifles: a "Short Lee-Enfield" for what he called "quick work"..... and a Ross for long-range shooting. The only shot he ever talked about was with the Ross: a total-darkness shot straight down the sights of a Jerry sniper who was shooting through a loophole. One round from the Ross..... and no more sniping in their sector for quite some time. The sniper already had scored on several of our men.
I have written in this forum several times already of my conversations with two men who used the Ross Rifle Mark III during the Gas Attack at St. Julien in the Second Battle of Ypres. These men were L/Cpl Robert Courtice and Pte. Alex McBain, both serving with "A" Coy, 8th Battalion (the "Little Black Devils", now the Royal Winnipeg Rifles. "A" Company was the single Reserve Company of 8th Battalion on that day (99 years ago TODAY). Jerry put through the Gas (chlorine) and followed it by trying to pour a DIVISION through the gap in the Line. The French North African troops, having NO gas protection at all, broke and ran; the ones who stood their ground (and there were too many of them) choked to death in the green mist.
"A" Company ran up THROUGH the gas. Their only protection was urine-soaked cloths over their faces. L/Cpl Courtice used his field dressing, Pte. McBain used a sock. When they closed with the advancing German troops, what followed was the single most horrific rifle engagement in the annals of warfare. Each man in "A" Company was carrying 120 or 180 rounds of .303" Ball ammunition, Mark VII. Casualties were VERY heavy. The Ross Rifles were fired until they were TOO HOT TO TOUCH TO RELOAD, whereupon they were put to one side and a rifle from a casualty taken up and put into action. When the SECOND rifle was TOO HOT TO TOUCH TO RELOAD, it was put down the the men reverted to their original, now-cooled, rifles and continued the fight.
In this way, the men expended their ammunition..... and then re-ammunitioned from casualties and continued the battle.
BOTH men told me expressly that, despite this Hellish treatment, they had NO TROUBLE WHATSOEVER with the Ross Rifles.
Thinking on the vast quantity of ammunition which was expended, I (rather foolishly) asked Cpl. Courtice at what ranges they were shooting. A very old man, he blinked his eyes, looked at the floor and said, very quietly, "Too close to miss....".
Pte. McBain was wounded in the battle, kept on fighting and was invalided home to Brandon. His trip home, by the traditional Available Military Transport, took him a year and over 20,000 miles. Cpl. Courtice, unwounded at Second Ypres, was blown up by a 90-pounder only a couple of weeks later, at a place called GIVENCHY. He was the only survivor of the 12 men in his bay. When I knew him, he still had chunks of steel working their way out of his face and his brain; he had a little match-box in which he kept all the chunks of iron which had worked their way out over the years. Medical science at that time just was not equipped for what, even today, would be extremely risky brain surgery.
Rosses, even chopped and Bubba'd Mark III Rosses, can be quite shockingly accurate. If the Chamber has not been abused, brass comes out so perfect that it can be re-used almost indefinitely and reloaded with only a minor neck-sizing.
Hope this helps.
I'm going to sit quietly for a short while and remember my friends, Private Soldier Alex McBain and Lance-Corporal Robert Courtice of the 8th Battalion of the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
I would ask YOU to think of them, also...... and of all the others, so many of whom did not come home.
Those are great stories, and I have had the opportunity to take a senior level university course on the History of World War I. Unfortunately there are really no Veterans left to describe the things that they experienced, so all we have are these stories passed from person to person. I hope I did not insult your choice in rifle, as I can see you have a personal connection to them and the men who used them. It is the Hundred year anniversary of the war this year, and I am hoping to see lots of people out paying respects. If I get the opportunity to try a Ross Rifle I will for sure look into it. Could me more reliable then the LE I picked up last weekend 
TargetAcquired
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Every time I shake my Grandfather's hand (and at 94, it is still a shockingly firm grip), I can't help but remember the ONLY time he ever mentioned anything about all his years in the War, and that was that he shipped out a kid with all of his friends and eventually came to Canada a married man with no friends left - Grandma was a war bride and sadly left us just under a year ago. They both made it through many years at war, in one capacity or another, then moved to Canada and bought a small home in Toronto where they raised 8 kids while Gran worked at Hudson's Bay and Gramps drove a bus for the TTC for over 30 years.
She was just a nurse, and he was just an engineer ('sapper'), both decorated, but neither highly. No ace pilots or romantic snipers. You know, just heroes - thats all.
That I am still privileged enough to shake his hand is all the reminder I need that my right to talk like an ass on the internet was paved with the lives of heroes just like them.
She was just a nurse, and he was just an engineer ('sapper'), both decorated, but neither highly. No ace pilots or romantic snipers. You know, just heroes - thats all.
That I am still privileged enough to shake his hand is all the reminder I need that my right to talk like an ass on the internet was paved with the lives of heroes just like them.
No problem, SORIFERN.
I'm like my Grandfather: I have both and use them both. The Short Lee-Enfield rifle is without doubt the single finest bolt-action battle rifle ever produced. It is reliable, simple and it is immensely tough. It is also extremely quick to get into action, has a large magazine and is accurate enough to do the job at reasonable ranges.
The Ross Mark III, with its heavy, long barrel, minimum chamber and very sophisticated sights, was in many ways a specialist's instrument. With its normal Ross battle Aperture Sight, it was capable of astounding accuracy at ranges far beyond those at which iron sights commonly are used. It required care to use it, more care to prevent those sights from being damaged and it required ammunition which was made TO SPEC rather than the British-made oversized garbage which was supplied for it. In many ways, its downfall was that it was TOO GOOD for the period.
You have never tried a Ross? If you are ever out this way, there are half a dozen here you can try out. I am quite certain that there are racks of Rosses all across this country which would be available to someone who is trying to learn about them.
@ TARGET ACQUIRED:
We CALL them "The Greatest Generation"..... and it sounds so very TRITE.
The only problem is that THEY ARE The Greatest Generation. My Dad was an airplane instrument mechanic, worked up to be a Factory Inspector. My Mom built bombers until she took time off.... to build ME. They are both gone, now. Mom would have been 91 yesterday, Dad would have been 99 in July.
Our generation was brought up with the stories and the attitudes, but we can never really understand the EXPERIENCE.
Just a thought: get yourself a tape recorder or one of those little digital things that uses an SD card, sit down with Grandpa..... and get him to TALK. You will likely get a lot of funny stories but that is because the ones who were REALLY there prefer to remember these. But you might get some conversation that REALLY makes you appreciate them..... even more than you do now.
And tell Grandpa "Hi!" from us. We appreciate his contribution, even if the Government did all it could to ignore them when they came home.
I'm like my Grandfather: I have both and use them both. The Short Lee-Enfield rifle is without doubt the single finest bolt-action battle rifle ever produced. It is reliable, simple and it is immensely tough. It is also extremely quick to get into action, has a large magazine and is accurate enough to do the job at reasonable ranges.
The Ross Mark III, with its heavy, long barrel, minimum chamber and very sophisticated sights, was in many ways a specialist's instrument. With its normal Ross battle Aperture Sight, it was capable of astounding accuracy at ranges far beyond those at which iron sights commonly are used. It required care to use it, more care to prevent those sights from being damaged and it required ammunition which was made TO SPEC rather than the British-made oversized garbage which was supplied for it. In many ways, its downfall was that it was TOO GOOD for the period.
You have never tried a Ross? If you are ever out this way, there are half a dozen here you can try out. I am quite certain that there are racks of Rosses all across this country which would be available to someone who is trying to learn about them.
@ TARGET ACQUIRED:
We CALL them "The Greatest Generation"..... and it sounds so very TRITE.
The only problem is that THEY ARE The Greatest Generation. My Dad was an airplane instrument mechanic, worked up to be a Factory Inspector. My Mom built bombers until she took time off.... to build ME. They are both gone, now. Mom would have been 91 yesterday, Dad would have been 99 in July.
Our generation was brought up with the stories and the attitudes, but we can never really understand the EXPERIENCE.
Just a thought: get yourself a tape recorder or one of those little digital things that uses an SD card, sit down with Grandpa..... and get him to TALK. You will likely get a lot of funny stories but that is because the ones who were REALLY there prefer to remember these. But you might get some conversation that REALLY makes you appreciate them..... even more than you do now.
And tell Grandpa "Hi!" from us. We appreciate his contribution, even if the Government did all it could to ignore them when they came home.
Last edited:
I'll just post this here http://www.cefresearch.ca/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=805&start=0
the thread details some of the memoirs of a Frank Iriam a scout with 8th Battalion during the battle of Second Ypres.
the thread details some of the memoirs of a Frank Iriam a scout with 8th Battalion during the battle of Second Ypres.
well, Canadian Soldiers did use to get rid of their Ross Rifles in favour of the Lee-Enfield
There are a lot of "hearsay" comments and statements made about the Ross Rifle and it's performance in WWI. Certainly some Soldiers took advantage of weapons lying around and used them, but before the POLITICAL decision to rearm with the SMLE, it was not a wide scale happening and a Canadian Soldier could even be Charged if found in possession of a SMLE instead of his issued Ross.
Even today, buying a Ross at a Gun Show and walking around with it will probably get you a few words of "advice" from people who have no idea of the Ross, but will repeat those dire warnings of having your head blown off by an "exploding" bolt. A couple of weeks ago, I bought a 1905 Ross (mostly as a parts rifle but closer inspecion at home revealed it's possibilities,) at the Ancaster Gun Show and had two people comment on the rifle and it's weakness and tendency to blow up. Now, possibly a 1910 action with a bolt assembled wrongly, but that is a different model. I also had a CGN member stop me an introduce himself because I was carrying a Ross, and then had the pleasure of a long chat with CANTOM.
SMELLIE has covered a lot in his preceeding posts, and mentions the ammunition problems. Canadian ammunition was made with a greater tolerance to specifications than British cartridges, and the British liked to use it for their Machine Guns because of this. The "jamming" of the Ross was mostly due to the out-of-specifications British ammunition issued to the Canadians in the trenches, the most "famous" of which was the issue of Birmingham Iron and Metals Lot B14 and Lot B15 at Ypres----ammunition that had been CONDEMNED by British Inspectors.
The use of the "SEARCH" function here will disclose many Threads and Posts on the Ross, and help to give a better understanding of this rifle.
.
Last edited:
- Location
- Manitoulin Island
This is an astounding first-hand account from a survivor of the gas attack. I hope that the transcription makes its way into the archives of the Canadian War Museum. Certainly indicates that the Ross did as well under corrosion by chlorine gas as the Lee-Enfield. I have never heard this description of corrosion before and wonder how many others have?
The son of Frank Iriam Glenn Iriam published the memoirs albeit in edited form entitled "In the Trenches 1914 - 1918" and amazon.ca has copies for right around $20.
I had always wondered if the chlorine gas affected the men surely it would have affected the kit and weapons but very few books mention it so thought nothing of it until reading Iraim's work and went ahha it makes sense now.
It also seems that the ross had a slight advantage as it was a straight pull one could use brute force such as a boot to the bolt to open it where as the Enfield according to Iriam "you had to pry under the handle with the blade of a bayonet to turn the bolt each time and if you succeeded in turning the bolt up, it was then another task to drive it back and then ahead again and in most cases it could not be done for the bolt seized fast in its channel from corrosion and would not repeat even after being driven and forced a couple of times back and forward"
But getting back on topic both the lee enfield and ross rifle have a place in the gun safe and both are interesting designs.
I WISH I would meet somebody who had a Ross, and was convinced it was a dangerous piece of garbage. I would soberly nod my head, and offer to take it off his hands for cheap.
I think the bad rap for the Ross Rifle has more to do with the nasty politics of military procurement, and with the desire by Britain to keep colonial forces solidly within the British sphere of command and control. And (some of) the colonies were desiring to stretch their wings and become more independent.
Even as a kid, I wondered "If the Ross was so gawd awful bad, why was it a preferred rifle for snipers?"
I think the bad rap for the Ross Rifle has more to do with the nasty politics of military procurement, and with the desire by Britain to keep colonial forces solidly within the British sphere of command and control. And (some of) the colonies were desiring to stretch their wings and become more independent.
Even as a kid, I wondered "If the Ross was so gawd awful bad, why was it a preferred rifle for snipers?"
This describes part of it IMO, but primarily it was a determination by the UK gun makers to shut down a competitor, which the US manufacturers would also have been happy to see. A representative of B.S.A. openly stated this before WWI.
There will be a program broadcast fairly soon that hopefully will address this with a practical test. That's all we know for now.
