Ross vs. Mauser???

N

Nelson84

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Location
Kootenays
Lets say there is a battle in Alberta. Not talking oilers and flames or stamps and eskis. Say 1915, dry conditions long range fire fights. Who would win? The :canadaFlag:Ross rifle against the Mauser? My vote is for the Ross. I may have set up the scenario in favor of the Ross, but to bad not every battle is in the mud.
 
The Ross beat just about every service rifle around in 1915 as far as accuracy went. Just not a great battle rifle as far as toughness and reliability went.
 
A Ross has better sights for careful long range shooting than a Mauser. And at that, the Brits in South Africa in 1900 gained a geat deal of respect for the Mauser at long range. I bet that if you were on the receiving end, you couldn't tell which was being shot at you.
 
In DRY conditions I'd give a very slight edge to the Ross. It was known for its accuracy, and continued to be used as a sniper rifle after it was withdrawn from regular service. The Gew98 Mauser was pretty accurate, too.

In mud, snow, or anything but dry, the edge goes to the Mauser because of it's reliability. The Ross has bolt jamming issues when in mud or snow.
 
A Mauser with mud or snow in the action is going to have functionning problems as well. Try it.
 
Last edited:
Whoevers artillery that really has their sh!t together that day would win.

But if it were rifles only, no arty and no mg's: Out of every rifle that I have fired from that period, I'll pick the American Springfield 1903 "Mauser".

Never tried a Ross, they are rather scarce. Would try one out for sure if I ever come across one.
 
Plus when the rosses were shot fast for extended periods of time they started to sieze up from heat. At least that's what I understand. I admit though that any condition that resulted in sustained fast firing like that would also probably result in mud getting in the action and dirty ammo being loaded, however the reports specifically mentioned receivers being too hot to touch and having to kick the bolt open and switch out guns to allow the first to cool. The very last bit makes me suspect that it was heat caused jamming rather than dirt.

I love rosses, but I'm inclined to give it to the mauser, just a tougher design. The ross is accurate, smooth and beautifully made, but in a tough sustained battle I just can't see it being that big an advantage.
 
H Wally said:
Plus when the rosses were shot fast for extended periods of time they started to sieze up from heat. At least that's what I understand. I admit though that any condition that resulted in sustained fast firing like that would also probably result in mud getting in the action and dirty ammo being loaded, however the reports specifically mentioned receivers being too hot to touch and having to kick the bolt open and switch out guns to allow the first to cool. The very last bit makes me suspect that it was heat caused jamming rather than dirt.

I love rosses, but I'm inclined to give it to the mauser, just a tougher design. The ross is accurate, smooth and beautifully made, but in a tough sustained battle I just can't see it being that big an advantage.
Click to expand...

Another vote for the Mauser
 
As a service rifle the Ross is a great collector's item.
I have been collecting, shooting and trying to repair them for a long time and I do not have confidence in them.
Almost all modern bolt action sporters are based on the mauser and the Ross is a dead end.
 
purple said:
Well, we sh@t-canned the Ross after our experience with it in the trenches. The Germans kept the Mauser throughout and went on to build a pee-pot more for the next go-round.
Click to expand...

That about sums it up. No matter what conditions or scenarios you want to put up, if the Ross was that good, it would still be around, and copied by other gun makers. Instead, it's just a footnote in firearms history, while the Mauser action still lives on.
 
HOWEVER......

In the gas attack in the St.-Julien sector, two men from A Company, 8th Battalion, told me that they both fired their Rosses until they were too hot to touch to reload.

They then acquired Rosses from casualties and continued the fight until THOSE rifles were too hot to touch, then went back to their own now-cooled rifles.

The men were Private Alex McBain and Lance-Corporal Robert Courtice.

Lance-Corporal Courtice denied that they had ANY problems with their rifles.

Private McBain was most vehement in his denial of problems with the Ross, very nearly becoming violent when I suggested that there might have been a problem. "We had NO problems with the Ross Rifle! It's all lies!"

These men could not have confused that battle with any other because, for each man, Second Ypres was their ONLY big fight. Private McBain was shot during the battle and invalided out when it was over, then sent home. Lance-Corporal Courtice was blown up by a 90-pounder (15cm) at Givenchy, a day before the attack.

It should be noted that A Company, 8th Battalion was the Reserve Company; they were the ones who went up through the gas and plugged the Line when the French Colonial troops (who had no protection against Gas) broke and ran. This was the "schwerpunkt" of the German attack, with several German DIVISIONS scheduled to pour through the gap. German troops were carrying the Gew 98 (Mauser) rifle.

The 120 men of A Company, 8th Battalion (the Little Black Devils) were in a position to LOSE THE WAR that day, but they did not.

The ensuing battle was a pure rifle engagement at very close ranges ("Too close to miss," said L/Cpl Courtice).

The Ross won.

Further deponent sayeth not.
 
I do have an issue with the premise. No trench warfare stays dry. I don't care where you dig a trench, either it's so dry that the trench collapses and it's not really trench warfare, of you succeed in digging the trench and in no time at all, part of it bisects an aquifer and it turns to mud, or it rains for just one day and the trench turns to mud for weeks. Alberta is no exception.

In a war of mud, the Mauser will be the more reliable rifle across a wider tolerance of ammunition.

Either way, the men themselves will likely be the determining factor, not the rifle used.
 
A vote for mauser. One was made and widely used for 60 years in dozens of countries. One was not.
The mauser is one of the most successful actions of all time, the ross was not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom