Beautiful pictures in this thread.....so much history in those rifles. If only they could talk!
Ross ####-Please add your pics!
- Thread starter cantom
- Start date
Oh my.
Well the guy at the show was an expert. I am certainly not. One of them had the side mounted scope and the other a Winchester scope (this was the $3000 scope). The original sniper was correct because it was originally a sniper.
NOTE: the original sniper also had the wood cut down which was an original feature (sniper sporterized!).
I found him believable because he brings guns to every show that are not for sale. Neither of the Ross Snipers were for sale.
Today I received my near excellent Ross Sling. Just installed it...does add a lot to the rifle. Just imagine, almost a hundred years old, still in nice, crisp shape...
Does anyone know how to tie the knot properly?
Does anyone know how to tie the knot properly?
Those scoped rifles are beautiful. Personally I think a sporterized rifle is not a bubba when you can tell that the gunsmith had a certain amount of respect for the rifle.
I love the Ross sling. It is amazing how well leather can hold up over 100 years.
This has been a fantastic thread. I have been getting by with one rough Ross bayonet (another o the way) but one of these days I am going to write a big check for a really nice version. As much as I like the bayonets I have to admit it is the commercial Ross's that really tickle my fancy.
What do you rossperts think was really the reason behind the failure of the rifle in the trenches? The most reasonable explanation I heard was that there was a mistake in communication and the Canadian .303 cartridge and the bores of the rifles were a bit smaller than the British .303. When fed Canadian ammo the rifle worked fine but when fed Brit ammo it jammed. It would have been impossible to get Canadian ammo in the trenches where it was hard enough to resupply at all. That should be easy enough to check.
Another interesting theory I heard was the problems with the rifle were real but were overstated for political reasons.
What seems to be the prevailing theory is it was simply to complex and fine a tool for the muddy trenches. I do wonder if instead of dropping it a system of insuring that it was kept clean like the US did with the early M16's in Vietnam might have worked?
I love the Ross sling. It is amazing how well leather can hold up over 100 years.
This has been a fantastic thread. I have been getting by with one rough Ross bayonet (another o the way) but one of these days I am going to write a big check for a really nice version. As much as I like the bayonets I have to admit it is the commercial Ross's that really tickle my fancy.
What do you rossperts think was really the reason behind the failure of the rifle in the trenches? The most reasonable explanation I heard was that there was a mistake in communication and the Canadian .303 cartridge and the bores of the rifles were a bit smaller than the British .303. When fed Canadian ammo the rifle worked fine but when fed Brit ammo it jammed. It would have been impossible to get Canadian ammo in the trenches where it was hard enough to resupply at all. That should be easy enough to check.
Another interesting theory I heard was the problems with the rifle were real but were overstated for political reasons.
What seems to be the prevailing theory is it was simply to complex and fine a tool for the muddy trenches. I do wonder if instead of dropping it a system of insuring that it was kept clean like the US did with the early M16's in Vietnam might have worked?
Nice pics Cantom ....
Thanks for posting them...
I don't know about the knot, but this is the way the original sling on the 1905 Mk II***** (5 star) Ross Riflehttp://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=8 in the Canada - Milsurp Knowledge Libraryhttp://www.milsurps.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10 arrived. It looks like a straight forward simple loop knot?
Regards,
Badger
Thanks for posting them...
I don't know about the knot, but this is the way the original sling on the 1905 Mk II***** (5 star) Ross Riflehttp://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=8 in the Canada - Milsurp Knowledge Libraryhttp://www.milsurps.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10 arrived. It looks like a straight forward simple loop knot?
Regards,
Badger
One thing that was a big issue with the Mk III was the bolt stop was too small initially. When the bolt was drawn quickly back to bang into the stop, the rear lug was bent and/or peened and then when pushed forward into the locked position the bent lug would jam against the receiver recesses. Add that to cold, wet, muddy conditions and the fact that the bolt handle pulling straight back was the only force you could apply unlike the Enfield where you had leverage added...you had a very aggravating situation in the trenches.
That ammo issue was also a very big part of the problem.
By the time they figured this all out and corrected the issues it was too late, the rifle was thoroughly discredited...think Chretien scapegoating the helicopters and Dief cancelling the Avro Arrow...political footballs from self serving politicians trying to score cheap political points in Parliament...sigh.
Did I mention I hate politicians?
That ammo issue was also a very big part of the problem.
By the time they figured this all out and corrected the issues it was too late, the rifle was thoroughly discredited...think Chretien scapegoating the helicopters and Dief cancelling the Avro Arrow...political footballs from self serving politicians trying to score cheap political points in Parliament...sigh.
Did I mention I hate politicians?
I've definitely seen rifles in this thread that I had no idea existed...they're not mine unfortunately.
Photo 1
1. Very late .280 Scotch Deerstalker- stocked and trimmed as an M-10, with
the scarce Lyman 50 receiver sight.
2. Westley-Richards stocked and finished .280 Scotch Deerstalker
3. 1905-M circa late 1906, with early 'flag' safety.
4. 1905-R with a Lyman 50 receiver sight.
Photo 2
1. .280 M-10 with Porter sight- as new.
2. .280 M-10 with factory cheekpiece and Lyman 48 receiver sight.
3. .280 M-10 custom-stocked by Tom Shelhamer circa 1939.
4. .303 Custom 1905 Presentation rifle- to Pte. W.A. Hawkins for winning the
Kings Cup at Bisley-1913.
Photo 3
Early and late examples of the Ross .280 Long-Range single-shot rifle.
Photo 1
1. Very late .280 Scotch Deerstalker- stocked and trimmed as an M-10, with
the scarce Lyman 50 receiver sight.
2. Westley-Richards stocked and finished .280 Scotch Deerstalker
3. 1905-M circa late 1906, with early 'flag' safety.
4. 1905-R with a Lyman 50 receiver sight.
Photo 2
1. .280 M-10 with Porter sight- as new.
2. .280 M-10 with factory cheekpiece and Lyman 48 receiver sight.
3. .280 M-10 custom-stocked by Tom Shelhamer circa 1939.
4. .303 Custom 1905 Presentation rifle- to Pte. W.A. Hawkins for winning the
Kings Cup at Bisley-1913.
Photo 3
Early and late examples of the Ross .280 Long-Range single-shot rifle.
Last edited:
Those .280 single shots are some of the most elegant rifles I have ever seen.
The Deerstalkers are incredible but those single shots remind me of a cheetah or some other animal that has evolved for a very specialized purpose.
The Deerstalkers are incredible but those single shots remind me of a cheetah or some other animal that has evolved for a very specialized purpose.
Good question...lie back and put that beautiful wood butt against your scrotum and hope it doesn't hurt when you fire it???
Maybe that's why there's no recoil pad...
Last edited:
Lie more or less on your back, feet pointing toward the target, butt of rifle in your armpit, or put your forearm behind your head and catch the butt in the palm of your hand. Rifle rests across your leg. Some shooters even used a bite strap to hold their heads up.
I've inspected the II** rifles used by and won by Pte. Clifford when he won the King's Prize.
I've inspected the II** rifles used by and won by Pte. Clifford when he won the King's Prize.
Military Cadets- one from each of the four contracts- 1913/14/15/16.
Commercial Cadets-
Pre-production Cadet- longer barrelplus a barrel sleeve similar to the centrefire Commercials- no serials, but proofed.
Interesting Cadet back from England. serial on the barrel and Factory stamps in the wood,
Vanilla Commercial Cadet, but with RCAF stamps in wood and steel.
Commercial Cadets-
Pre-production Cadet- longer barrelplus a barrel sleeve similar to the centrefire Commercials- no serials, but proofed.
Interesting Cadet back from England. serial on the barrel and Factory stamps in the wood,
Vanilla Commercial Cadet, but with RCAF stamps in wood and steel.
