Ross vs P14

E

ENFIELD1911

Regular
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Location
Saskatoon, Sask
I was wondering which rifle is more accurate. I know they were both used as sniper rifles and that the P14 continued as one into WW2. All said and done at the end of the day of the two which one was is more accurate?
 
Hard to say which was more accurate as a scoped sniper rifle, the P14 was defiantly more reliable in the trenches and on the battlefield. Canadian snipers who could choose between the two choose to use both as witnessed by photos of them together with both rifles, you would have to ask them but sadly they are no longer around.
 
ENFIELD1911 said:
I was wondering which rifle is more accurate. I know they were both used as sniper rifles and that the P14 continued as one into WW2. All said and done at the end of the day of the two which one was is more accurate?
Click to expand...
An alternate question might be which one was easier to keep in an accurate state with hard field usage? As a sniper rifle that would, of course, include the scope/ mount portion of the equation. I know how to properly bed an Enfield P14 or Model 1917 and it's pretty easy. Can someone comment on how Ross's were bedded and any associated issues?

milsurpo
 
This is a good question.

I've spent the last several years comparing the accuracy of great war and second war rifles. I load them for accuracy and shoot the crap out of them. I've had the chance to compare everything from a 91 carcano, Styer m95 to lee Enfields etc.

My Ross MkIII is by far my most accurate stock military rifle. My Swede FSR target rifle is SLIGHTLY (and I mean VERY slightly) more accurate but it's also a match prepped rifle built by someone who knew their stuff.

I've shot 2 or 3 p14's (one of which is my own), they are very accurate in their own right. Usually 1 Moa rifles. So the old P14 is no slouch! Thing is my Ross will often put 4-5 in the same hole at 100 and at 200 the group often is 1/2- 3/4 Moa. Move out to 300 and a head sized 10" gong is a breeze to hit with the Ross. No joke but if you feed a Ross a load it likes, it will shoot that well, it's no wounder why snipers preferred them.

I'm going to do a Ross Vs K31 competition soon, I think the K31 may have a chance but I'm not sure because I'm usually wrong when I think anything will beat my Ross.
 
Last edited:
I have a very nice Winchester P-'14 here with a scope on it.

With ammunition it likes, it will shoot half an inch if you can hold it.

My 16th Battalion/HMS CANADA full-wood early-production Mark III Ross does better than that with iron sights.

I would not want to be in front of either one at anything under half a mile.

If the ammo was good and the guy on the trigger knew his stuff...... better make that a mile or so.

Seriously.
 
Good question, Lou!

Experimenting here indicates that the 1917 will keep up with the P-'14 as long as it is fed flat-base slugs.

The 5-groove Enfield-type rifling is wonderful stuff and gives you a barrel which will last 5/8 of forever, but it doesn't seem to like boat-tails.

Best groups I have ever had with any of these (and including the SMLE) always used flat-base slugs.
 
ENFIELD1911 said:
So what makes the Ross rifle so accurate? What is the rate of twist compared to that of the P14
Click to expand...

Quality manufacturing and design. The Ross was an adapted hunting/target rifle through and through. All the Enfields, and basically every other battle rifle ever, were designed to be just that: battle rifles. The Swiss are the only exception to that. Much like the pre-WWI Canadians, their doctrine was one-shot, one-kill. Accuracy and quality trumped all other conditions.
 
Take a Ross apart some time and just LOOK at the thing. Almost ALL the weight is in that heavy barrel and in the massive Receiver Ring. The lockup is unbelievably solid. The action is essentially self-cleaning. The trigger is a target-shooter's dream.

The Ross Rifle Mark II action has 40% more locking area than a Mauser and has double the locking mass.

It is VERY strong and was rated as a 100,000-pound action when in production.

It beat the world in Imperial competitions prior to the Great War.

The Mark III action had nearly three times the actual locking area of a Mark II.

How strong it is, nobody seems to know. Factory ran one at better than 125,000 which was all the pressure they could build and over the capacity of the pressure gun.

Put an action which locks up THAT solidly onto a heavy barrel which is made slowly and ultra-carefully to minimum tolerances and you have a recipe for potential accuracy. Feed it decent ammunition and it will beat anything less. The Ross proved that year after year at Bisley.

Twist was 1 turn in 10 inches, same as the Lee-Enfield, same as the P-'14, same as the M-1917. Ross RIFLING, however, was a unique form which was designed to outlast all others.

Ross chamber REAMERS were identical to the ones used at Enfield. The difference was that the Proof round EXPANDED the SMLE chamber .002"; the Ross barrel, heavier and encased in that massive Receiver Ring, did NOT expand when the Proof round was fired. Add THAT to wildly-out-of-spec ammunition and you have the recipe for a disaster.
 
If the Mark III Ross is assembled correctly, or if it has the "pinned" bolt, it is quite impossible for it to get out of adjustment. To throw the rifle out of adjustment requires HUMAN INTERVENTION.

An action which would handle 125,000 pounds pressure or higher likely is not going to be bothered by just about anything modern you can put through it. I know where there is one which has been rebarrelled to handle 7mm Rem Mag (a 60,000-pound+ cartridge) and it works fine. Remember, that load is spread out through SEVEN locking-lugs!

For a Magnum-class cartridge, the Bolt requires NO work; the rim of a .303 is the same size as the rim on a .280 Ross or on a 300 WinMag.

Remember, the rifles were sold, more than a century ago, chambered for the 280 Ross, which had an OPERATING pressure of 68,320 pounds and a Proof pressure of 80,000 or a bit more. The common military action is identical in every way to the action of the 280 Sporters. The Ross Rifle Company did not make military actions and sporting actions: they just made ACTIONS and then used them for whatever rifles they required for the market at that time.

On the chance that you get a rifle with a replaced Bolt or Bolt-head, it is good to know that the actions originally were factory LAPPED to provide an even bearing on all 7 lugs. This is important for the highest absolute strength and for the finest obtainable accuracy. When rebuilding a trashed rifle, checking the action for even lockup and, if necessary, lapping it, can be important.

Safety? I have been shooting Rosses for a bit over 50 years now. I still have all my fingers and both cheek-bones. SOME would say that that is unfortunate, but they are not as attached to those parts as I am! I think that Rosses are just fine!
 
Hey Smellie, what was the cartridge the P13, the predecessor to the P14 was designed for and chambered in? and how would it have compared to the .280 Ross?
 
Pattern of 1913 was chambered for a round they called the .276 Enfield, which actually was made in several variants.

The .276 was designed after experience shooting against the .280 Ross, although the .276 was not as long and not as heavy a load. It was, however, quite out of the ordinary for a prospective military cartridge. Shooters complained of the somewhat-brutal recoil and the military objected to the large muzzle flash. Obviously, the flash problem could have been dealt with, had there been time.

Gun show coming up just before Christmas. My present to the nicest guy I know (me, of course!) just might be a round. There was a single there last year and I didn't have the horoshchy but, this year..... I have TWO pockets!

There exists a small book or large pamphlet about the design and development of the .276 cartridge for the P.-'13 rifle. The booklet was written by the late Major Peter Labbett of Cheyne Walk, London, in his inimitable (and massively compressed) style. Without doubt it is and shall remain the Absolute Final Word on P-'13 ammunition development. You can download a copy of this incredible little book over at milsurps dot com, absolutely free.

BTW, a few P-13 rifles and some ammunition were disposed of in this country close to 50 years ago. The market now is utterly bare, of course, but over the past few years I have discovered 2 of the correct P-'13 Chargers ("stripper clips"). They are stamped sheet-metal with an inner spring, looking very much like a LARGE Mauser Charger. Each will fit 5 rounds of .276, .303 or 300 WinMag. They are BIG and enamelled black. The ones I have bear no distinguishing markings apart from their sheer size. Now you know what to look for.
 
Its the guy pulling the trigger and how much he bribes his units armourer to get the best rifle and ammo is all that matters.
facepalm_zpsf5c6ea89.gif


What is the matter with you Canadians, all you guys have now are the left over rifles held together with duct tape.

the-red-green-show-main-300x300_zps00ec2947.jpg


And any war movie history buff knows Sgt York and his American made M1917 Enfield rifle never missed. (You guys remember the rifle the Americans redesigned to make it shoot better by getting rid of those silly five groove British barrel) :stirthepot2:

SgtYork_zpsc92222d2.jpg


And what is a Ross rifle? (Ed remembers his American 1950s grade school nuclear attack training and ducks and covers) :evil:

vorsicht--kampfkatze--_zps1878ea0a.jpg


Sorry, but ever since "The X-Files" came on TV I have been wondering "WHY" so many American FBI agents were looking for aliens in Vancouver.


The_Truth_Is_Out_There_tagline_zps74d89e15.jpg


Or were they really looking for the mythical accurate Ross rifle. :ang3

trust-no-one_zps4697a28f.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom