Ross Rifle myths and realities

jumper said:
The myth of the bolt blowing open on a Ross is simply that: a myth. It is almost (but not entirely) impossible to assemble the bolt wrong.
I would like to point out that the first Ross was almost a knock-off of the Mannlicher 1895, which had a long service life. I suspect that the difficult extraction came from lack of cleaning. The same problem would occur with the M-1 Garand, for which a chamber cleaner was included with the rifle.
The Ross 1910 is an immensely strong action which has been altered by at least one gunsmith to 7mm Rem. Magnum
Click to expand...

Actually that is not entirely true jumper. Although the blown bolts are probably somewhat exagerated, it can happen. All you have to do to assemble the bolt incorrectly, and you don't even have to take the bolt apart, is to slip the extractor off the bolt head, pull the head out slightly and rotate it counterclockwise about 1/8 of a turn and let it drop back. The bolt head closes or collapses without rotating. Just to make sure I wasn't dreaming, I took my M-10 off the rack and gave the bolt a little twist, and put it back together. Closed the action( the bolt head didn't rotate of course, so now it is unlocked) and pulled the trigger. The cocking piece dropped. Had there been a live round in there I would be one severly injured or dead soldier. Now this wasn't easy to do. The bolt doesn't fit very well when it is assembled incorrectly. However, taking into consideration a 15, 16, or 17 year old child who up until a few weeks prior had not even seen a gun and who has Germans shooting at him, well I don't even want to think about it. This condition has nothing to do with the strength of the Ross action which is second to none, only maybe to a Jap Arisaka, but simply to the fact that it could be assembled wrong. Neither the Arisaka nor the Ross could be destroyed, apparently it was tried.
 
Hate to tell you, it is not impossible to assemble the bolt incorrectly! I have two, one with the mod one without and you can quite easily assemble the unmoded bolt incorrectly and have it insert into the action and look for all the world like it is properly closed.
As to the "Overheating" problem, I would tend to agree that it is more likely the last locking lug on the left side of the bolt getting hammered out of shape with the "Small" bolt stop and repeated bashings. Both of my "Ross's" ended up with me as actions only and I have barreled both to 7.62 NATO one with a heavy barrel the other a light barrel. Both are accurate and shoot well and the only hard extractions I have had with either is the Chinese .308 ammo with the steel cases.
Scott
 
Talked once upon a time with two men who were in the advancing company during the gas attack at Second Ypres, St. Julien sector, 8th Battalion CEF, they said "the first Company"......... A Coy. These were the troops who plugged up the hole in the Line and took the brunt of the following German assault. They were Pte. Alexander McBain and L/Cpl Robert A. Courtice. When I met them, both men were living in Brandon and has excellent recall.

Both men told me that they used their Rosses until the rifles were "too hot to reload", at which time they picked up another Ross from a casualty and continued fire with that rifle. When the substitute rifle was "too hot to hold", they picked up their now-cooled original rifles and continued fire. Neither man had troubles with bolts sticking. L/Cpl Courtice said that the range was "too close to miss"; sounded pretty horrific to me. Both men used all of their own ammunition and scrounged far more from casualties. How much went through an individual rifle I can't say.

I would regard these men as the oracles of what happened that day.

In my own experience, I have put a lot of ammo through Rosses, and some of it pretty fast. I have had a rifle too hot to keep your hand on, and I've had one too hot to touch anywhere near the receiver ring, but the bolt handle was relatively cool. I say "relatively": it was warm but could be touched, although you definitely could burn your hand stripping rounds from a charger into the magazine: the receiver ring was very hot.

As to bolts, yes, they CAN be assembled wrong, but it is an easy and quick thing to fix, easy to spot ("rule of thumb": if your thumb fits between the head the the sleeve, it's safe) and the rifle can NOT get out of whack by itself.
 
GWVA - Great War Veterans Association. It was not the Royal Canadian Legion, but a different group with other objectives. A marked rifle is odd because the war was over when I expect the organization was formed, so maybe it was a shooting club rifle? But, the official service rifle for formal matches would have been the No.1 SMLE.
 
TheIndifferent1 said:
Might also be able to get one of the engineering guys to help with some of the math regarding the amount of heat transfered through the cartridge base to the bolthead. P
Click to expand...

My point about heat transfer was for the entire surface of the chambered cartridge, not just the base. If it was the larger area to cause sticking, any heat transfer to the bolt face would not be a contributing factor in hard extractions.
 
Well - The greatest amount of heat transfer occurs by radiation and convection from the powder burn to the barrel. Given that the barrel is encapsulated in wood, the ability to dissipate heat is severely challenged - this is what causes the severe temp rise in the action (ie too hot to handle)
I would doubt the conduction heat transfer from the case would cause much of a gain to the bolt/handle, compared to the direct contact in the receiver rails, and in the case of the Ross, the serrations in the bolt head. The helical threads must be mated tight by design, this would offer substanrial contact area for heat transfer. Compared to a SMLE, this avenue for heat transfer would be much greater, so perhaps the bolts did get substantialy hotter!
I've got several Rosses, but I've never shot them in sustained-fire mode, so I cant comment on the phenomenon. However, at deer camp two years ago, I managed to surprise myself and the others in camp, with the Rosses ability to spit lead quickly. I let four shots go as quick as any lever or semi! Perhaps it was this quick cycling, rapid-fire advantage that caused the overheating problems...
 
Last edited:
Much of the trouble was caused by bad ammo made by inexperienced companies. The worst was probably National Brass and Copper Tube Co , Hastings NY, hs H. This company went on to get a contract for 30-06 ammo with the US, hs N C. This ammo is mentioned several times in the reports on blown up low number Springfields.
 
I think that the anecdotal report from soldiers who used the rifle at Ypres is very valuable information that you could use in an article. Certainly given a hot oversized cartridge, the Ross would be unable to exert the same camming force as a turn-bolt design. One thing that is not often mentioned is that the earlier Mk I models as supplied to the RCMP had bolt blowback issues as noted in the "Sir Charles Ross and his Rifle" booklet, where after a bolt blew back and blinded Sgt-Maj. W.J. Bowbridge, the Mk.1 rifles in western detachments and the Yukon were recalled and stored, in 1909 returned to the factory for replacement with Mk II rifles. Certainly another knock against the Ross for trench warfare was its extreme length compared with the Lee-Enfield, and I have read somewhere here about soldiers complaining it was hard to get into and out of dugouts.
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
GWVA - Great War Veterans Association. It was not the Royal Canadian Legion, but a different group with other objectives. A marked rifle is odd because the war was over when I expect the organization was formed, so maybe it was a shooting club rifle? But, the official service rifle for formal matches would have been the No.1 SMLE.
Click to expand...

OK maple_leaf_eh, then my friend was right, GWVA did stand for Great War Veterans Association. Could this rifle be some what of an anomaly I wonder?
 
On the Lee Enfield collectors' forums the expression is, never say never when it comes to Enfields. Someone will always come up with an example or a document or a marking to support some of the most unbelievable chains of events.

I don't know enough about WWI and post WWI ordnance and supply to begin to speculate on how a Ross got a GWVA marking. But if it has military proofs and acceptances, at some point in its life, that rifle was carried by a man in uniform. If not, then the really difficult questions start getting asked.
 
green said:
Much of the trouble was caused by bad ammo made by inexperienced companies. The worst was probably National Brass and Copper Tube Co , Hastings NY, hs H. This company went on to get a contract for 30-06 ammo with the US, hs N C. This ammo is mentioned several times in the reports on blown up low number Springfields.
Click to expand...

X2, i suspect the tight chamber specs on the original ross and poor wartime ammo did as much as anything else to cause the jamming...not much initial extraction force, but it's easy to ram closed......sort of like why your better off never using the forward assist device on an ar, if it won't close, clear it
 
I have fired my Ross M10 in service rifle matches. It is a very accurate rifle. However, I have had some problems with it as far as reliability. Rim over rim jams in the magazine are very difficult to clear quickly and can put the rifle out of action in a rapid fire match (or combat).
The chamber on my rifle is very tight. I can fire a round in the Ross and still easily chamber it in a No4. Given the lack of primary extraction leverage it is easy to see how this could cause hard extractions in battlefield conditions. And finally as pointed out, the rifle is very long and heavy compared to the SMLE.
It should be pointed out however, that the Ross rifles did continue to be used by snipers throughout the remainder of the war. They were good rifles but not as good as the SMLE in a trench.
 
INDIFFERENT 1 YPRES and the ROSS

INDIFFERENT 1 MY GRANDAD ,whom i grew up with, was at the second battle of YPRES. i used to go with him to the ARMORY ON ,I BELIEVE bleurry STREET, IN MONTREAL. HE WAS A MEMBER OF THE 13th. BATT. 42 REG. BLACH WATCH. R.C.H. MONTREAL. HE HATED 2 THINGS IN LIFE. THE FRENCH SOLDIERS(france, notCANADIAN), FOR THROWING DOWN THEIR RIFLES AND RAISING THEIR ARMS IN SURRENDER TO GERRY, AND THE ROSS RIFLE. AT YPRES,HE TOLD ME THAT COMMERADS WOULD THROW AWAY THEIR ROSSES AND PICK UP ENFIELDS. HIS NAME WAS ROBERT CAMPBELL, CPL. MY 2 .303 ROSS RIFLES SHOT WELL, BUT DID NOT FIND THEM TO BE VERY ACCURATE. GAVE BOTH AWAY.(kert my ross .22 SINGLE SHOT)OVER THE YEARS ,I HAVE COME ACROSS 2 PLAUSABLE REASONS FOR BOLT PROBLAMS. VERY SOFT BOLT lugs THAT COULD DEFORM WHEN rammed shut ON A ROUND WHEN FULL OF DIRT AND GRIT. NEXT, THE BOLT COULD BE ASSEMBLED incorrectly AND NNOT lock PROPERLY, THEN blow back ON FIRING. TO CORRECT THIS,LATE MODEL ross rifles HAD A blind rivet, IN THE BOLT TO PREVENT TOTAL BOLT DIS ASSEMBLY. P.S. ARE YOU SURE THE DATE OF THE BATTLE WAS APIIL 24?. :) pops IN BEAUTIFUL B.C.
 
Cap lock stuck on, or you just like shouting? As mentioned the Canadian Army at the time kept the Ross on strenth for sniping...accuracy was always superiour to the smle...
 
Ross Myths And Urban Legends

The early MkIII's with the stamped, not forged nosecaps, also had the top chunk of walnut clipped to the barrel with flush rivets- later on with the heavier nosecap the rivets were countersunk, surely as a result of heat transfer burning hands....
Always remember:-
1. Like US and CDN politics, a lie told often enough becomes accepted truth.
2. CDN grunts in WW1 were not allowed to "strip bolts"- that was an Armourer's job only.
3. Many of the tolerance problems with the Military Ross rifles were the result of government-inflicted "inspectors" who most likely owed their jobs more to political connections than mechanical expertise....strange that similar problems seldom if ever turned up on Commercial rifles....the few that did were investigated and were found to have been a result of "operator error"....
Rossguy.
 
The SMLE digested those "inferior quality" .303 rounds with no problem.
Much as I like the two ross Rifles I own, a straight pull is always more tiring to use in extended firing than a turn bolt.
 
The Great War Veterans' Association was only one of quite a number of veterans' groups existing in the immediate post-Great War era. Another was the Comrades of the Great War. GWVA originally was known as GWV simply. Another vets' group was the Kinsmen, believe it or not.

Most of these groups (NOT including the Kinsmen) amalgamated with the BESL (British Empire Service League) to form the Canadian Legion (now the Royal Canadian Legion) following the GWVA's 1926 convention in Winnipeg.

The complaint regarding difficulty getting into dugouts with the Ross slung was originally posted by me, on a different thread. It came from Capt. George Dibblee, DCM, A Coy, 5th Battalion, Canadian Mounted Rifles. He also reported that his Batt had NO trouble with their Rosses. He got the DCM while he was a Sergeant, at a particularly hellish place called Regina Trench. Three thousand Canadians attacked, 15 got into the trench at one location, 120 at another. He commanded the 120-man group after all of their officers were taken out for wounds, held the trench for 14 hours against a brigade of Imperial German Marines. He was able to get 15 to 20 men out, the following morning. He was awarded the DCM simply because they had to give him SOMETHING, and a VC for an enlisted man required 2 officers to witness the deed, and there were no officers. He had been a cowboy and a guide for the NWMP previous to the Great War and was a schoolteacher after the war. He is buried at Miniota, Manitoba. Last time I visited with him, he showed me his brand-new 1886 Winchester that he bought with his first pay packet from the NWMP; it still looked new. He was a gracious host, an intelligent man who weighed every word before he said it, a positive joy to interview and a good guy to boot. We all lost a lot with the passing of his generation.
 
I have a great book here by Tony Edwards that covers the "issues" with the Ross Rifles. He has written a series of publications on secondary arms of the First World War so the Ross, Arisaka and P14 all came into play. One covers Naval Use, the other Land Use. They are great books and can bought from Solo Publications, the one you will need is Part 3. trouble is that having read 1 you end up getting the set.
I dont have a web address but Tony lectures once or twice a year at the IWM for the HBSA.
 
Hi The Indifferent1.
Once again my feelings on the Ross' traits as previously posted...

As far as incorrect bolt assembly is concerned it appears that it is one of those incidents that recieves a lot more attention than incidents dictate. Kind of like "razor blades in apples at Halloween". Not that we should not be aware, however, just understand the issue and deal with it. A Ross bolt is difficult to install wrongly assembled and it can be verified correct by many a competent gunsmith. Deal with it responsibly. Done.
As for the jamming in WW1. Yes the action is obviously less tollerant of dirt/mud being jammed into the action. The complexity and design of the action as compared to other bolt actions make this somewhat obvious. Especially the lack of force available to cam the action fully closed or to open the bolt from a fully closed position. A regular bolt style action transfers fully the rotational effort by the user to uncam the lugs. In using the Ross however the force one exerts pulling straight back is only fractionally converted to the rotational force which uncams the lugs. If all is free in movement then this is quite satisfactory. Otherwise it quickly makes for a difficult cycling. Here lies the actual issue with what I believe has been identified by others than myself as the real issue with Ross jamming problems. The rear lugs on the bolt come in contact with the receiver to stop its rearward motion on opening of the bolt. It is the deformation, however slight, which causes a less than perfect mating fit of the bolt lugs on closing. This, COMBINED WITH, the tightening of tolerances in the recieving lugs as the barrel gets warm/hot after firing makes for a situation where upon closing hard the bolt lugs jam into the receiving slots tight enough that the force one exerts rearward on the bolt is insufficient to break it free so it can cam out. I can easily demonstrate this with my own rifle by cycling about 15 -20 rounds quickly through it until it suddenly jams tight. Simply by letting it cool for a good 20-30 minutes, it opens and functions again quite easily.
Although there may be some merrit to "tight chambers" and "large ammo", I quite suspect this was simply knee-jerk political and manufacturer excuses for what at the time was a problem not understood. (This was somewhat as hot of a political topic in that time as "Afganistan" is today so public information was/is quite clouded by politcal jousting and media inaccuracies.)
I enjoy my Ross rifle very much by the way.

The National Film Board of Canada has 3 great videos which give reference to the Ross issues during WW1. They are:
1. "Sam's Army" ISBN 0-7722-1006-3
2. "The Battle of Vimy Ridge" ISBN 0-7722-0689-9
3, "The Last 100 Days" ISBN 0-7722-1007-1
Check you local library.

Cheers
Jaguar/The County
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom