What is the most accurate milsurp bolt action

Nov2013_zps1027be3d.jpg%7Eoriginal
 
K31 for me. Sold my 2 red rifles after getting the K31 and bought more GP11. Love to hear the gongs at 300 yrds with steel sights. Its that accurate.
 
The Ross is the most accurate i my cabinet. It seems to be the best balanced and has a heavy barrel like a sniper rifle. The k31has a heavy barrel too and a great rifle all around. But my ross just kicks the hell out of the rest for accuracy. The rest seem to kick and jump the barrel up wards. The ross seems to kick straight back. The ross is better made than the rest by far. I own every rifle except the M1. :(
 
I am no expert but a lot of older shooters have said the Lee
Enfield SMLE was a very accurate rifle. Any body else heard this.
 
Had a Belgian 303 "enfield ?" some years back. The out-side of the barrel looked Spiraled. It was the most accurate 303 I'd ever shot. had different sights on it as well. cant remember to much more,..was 30 years ago.
 
An M1's standard front sight is .072" wide. Reducing it to .062" makes a big difference. Done so for U.S. National Match rifles.
Ya'll seem to forget the 1903 and 1903A3 Springfield was one of themost accurate bolt actions rifles that ever actually saw use in combat. No K31 ever saw actual combat. Ross rifles were hopeless in combat.
 
sunray said:
An M1's standard front sight is .072" wide. Reducing it to .062" makes a big difference. Done so for U.S. National Match rifles.
Ya'll seem to forget the 1903 and 1903A3 Springfield was one of themost accurate bolt actions rifles that ever actually saw use in combat. No K31 ever saw actual combat. Ross rifles were hopeless in combat.
Click to expand...

Yes but even though the Ross couldn't handle the dirt of battle conditions it was acknowledged to be extremely accurate. It was it's tight tolerances that made it so accurate, and that was also it's Achilles heel on the battlefield. It is still a milsurp and is accurate. That is what this thread is about, not how long it was used.
 
ljones said:
Yes but even though the Ross couldn't handle the dirt of battle conditions it was acknowledged to be extremely accurate. It was it's tight tolerances that made it so accurate, and that was also it's Achilles heel on the battlefield. It is still a milsurp and is accurate. That is what this thread is about, not how long it was used.
Click to expand...

Looks like OP has 2 choices.

As a side, there is a good write up of the Ross in the National Post.
http://ww1.canada.com/battlefront/canadas-ross-rifle-more-peril-than-protection-for-first-world-war-soldiers-with-video
 
The sweed was dang fine as was the ross problem with the ross was it was built only for accuracy and nothing ells so any dirt in them and they would bind up but if you could keep them clean you could hit what you needed with them... I knew an old war horse that could hit a pie pan at well over 500 yards with any .303 brit L.E. 4mk1.

I wold still have to toss my vote a the sweed or L.E. 4mk1 as my vote.
 
sunray said:
An M1's standard front sight is .072" wide. Reducing it to .062" makes a big difference. Done so for U.S. National Match rifles.
Ya'll seem to forget the 1903 and 1903A3 Springfield was one of themost accurate bolt actions rifles that ever actually saw use in combat. No K31 ever saw actual combat. Ross rifles were hopeless in combat.
Click to expand...

I think your mention of the Springfield is pretty much impossible to argue with. But to malign the Ross is not so fair IMO. Just about everyone knows that the Brits scrounged up all of the superior grade Canadian arsenal .303 ammo to keep their MGs humming along. Hence the Ross was fielded using second or even third rate British ammunition that was actually condemned! Also several Canadian snipers did continue to use the Ross in the battlefield. This has to tell you something?
 
I heard the WSS ones are rougher than others. Check CT too if you have the option to.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom