WWI comment on unservicable rifles

[Colin]

found this quote:

In each ambulance the transport section carried arms
for purpose of defence. Reports were now prevalent that
the rifles were unserviceable. As late as September 8,
those sections were paraded to Sandling where workshops
had been set up. The breech was enlarged so that the
cartridge would fit more loosely. Each man was allowed
to fire two shots into a bank of earth, and if the bolt did
not jamb, the weapon was declared by the officer in
charge to work to perfection. He volunteered the
information that the cause of the trouble was the bad quality of the ammunition supplied from British stores.

source; http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/docs/CFGW_MedSvc_e.pdf

 

[Claven2]

What are they talking about? EY marked Enfields, Rosses??

 

[Pblatzz]

Sounds like the Ross MkIII, and the tight chambering of "bad quality of the ammunition supplied from British stores".

 

[Nabs]

That quote must relate to the Ross rifles.

 

[Colin]

That's all I could find in a quick scan, looking for stuff on my Grandfather's unit No. 6 Causality clearing station. Thought the stated fix would be another piece in the puzzle for you guys.

 

[bigedp51]

The chamber on all Enfield rifles were also enlarged to make room for the mud of Flanders. British "Textbook of Small Arms" 1929

This is why commercial SAAMI ammunition doesn't like being reloaded due to the longer and larger diameter "military" chamber.

I'm guessing but the straight pull Ross rifle lacked the primary extraction force that the Enfield rifle had. This allowed the Enfield rifle to extract dirty and poorly made ammunition.

 

[smellie]

Some of the BM&M ammo was so bad that even the LE couldn't handle it.

This definitely sounds as if it were a part of the Ross story. If it were not, the date wouldn't have been mentioned.
.

 

[John Sukey]

One wonders why the Ross couldn't handle some .303 British ammo, but the SMLE didn't have a problem

 

[smellie]

SMLE had problems with some of the Brit ammo that was made sloppily, especially in the early part of the war. Ammo was accepted which should have been trashed. They just didn't have the technology available right then for a war of THAT magnitude, so mistakes were made.

Problem was that the British Gummint already had spent 1879 through to 1914 developing the LM, LE and then the SMLE: 35 years. It was, therefore, the pinnacle of possible development, never mind that the P-'13 already was in the wings and being produced as the P-'14. The ROSS was a mere "colonial" development AND it was good, despite never having had a troop trial under field conditions. John, you guys had problems with this same attitude, back in 1775/6 and look what happened!

But the Ross was dumped upon royally and every effort was made to make it look as bad as possible. The SMLE had some of the same problems with the bum ammo although NOT to the same extent. The Ross got reamed out and it was well-advertised. The SMLE got a larger chamber, also in 1916, but it was done very quietly.

If the ammo is halfway decent, EITHER rifle will function flawlessly. If the ammo is bad ENOUGH, you can jam up ANYTHING. The term "Jammin`Jenny" does come to mind in this regard.
.

 

[Forty4Forty]

Reading the Ross story, if my memory is correct, the Ross chamber was designed with tight tolerances for Canadian made .303 ammo which was not the same specs as the British ammo issue on the front, this contributed to the jamming, the above sounds reasonable enlarging the chamber may have solved one of the issues.

 

[x westie]

SMLE had problems with some of the Brit ammo that was made sloppily, especially in the early part of the war. Ammo was accepted which should have been trashed. They just didn't have the technology available right then for a war of THAT magnitude, so mistakes were made.

Problem was that the British Gummint already had spent 1879 through to 1914 developing the LM, LE and then the SMLE: 35 years. It was, therefore, the pinnacle of possible development, never mind that the P-'13 already was in the wings and being produced as the P-'14. The ROSS was a mere "colonial" development AND it was good, despite never having had a troop trial under field conditions. John, you guys had problems with this same attitude, back in 1775/6 and look what happened!

But the Ross was dumped upon royally and every effort was made to make it look as bad as possible. The SMLE had some of the same problems with the bum ammo although NOT to the same extent. The Ross got reamed out and it was well-advertised. The SMLE got a larger chamber, also in 1916, but it was done very quietly.

If the ammo is halfway decent, EITHER rifle will function flawlessly. If the ammo is bad ENOUGH, you can jam up ANYTHING. The term "Jammin`Jenny" does come to mind in this regard.
.

a very interesting read,..thanks for posting

 

[RRCo.]

Defective ammunition, both small arms and artillery was supplied from numerous US factories. Partly greed and incompetence, partly deliberate sabotage, often by German immigrants to the US. Read about how the Colt MGs had to be smuggled out of the factory at night so the German workers wouldn't find out!

McBride refers to this junk .303 and how machine gunners avoided it if they could.

Smellie has the background politics summed up, except that Liberal party supporters in Canada and the CEF hated the Ross and Conservatives tended to support it.

The SMLE was the better rifle for the average soldier in the trenches however. The Ross was definitely the best for snipers or soldiers who had the interest and skill to maintain it properly.