Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
7,944 Posts
IIRC the complaint was that the Canadians weren't using an issue military weapon because their target rifles were in .280 Eley and couldn't fit a bayonet. the Mk 3 Ross problems were 1. the upside down disassembly issue, fixed by adding a rivet to the bolt preventing upside down reassembly, 2. a chamber designed for tighter tolerances than British ammunition manufacturing standards, fixed by reaming out the chamber and 3. the lips of the first thread on the locking bolts were too thin and susceptible to damage, causing cycling difficulty. The soldiers would get an oversized cartridge, pound it in the chamber with various trench utensils and cause damage to the locking threads making the gun more stiff rather than less. Quickly the gun would seize entirely and the soldier woulld end up with an expensive spear. All these issues were fixed in field workshops, but by that time the decision had been made to arm the Canadian contingent with Enfields.
Supposedly in the late 1950s Russians won "running boar" event (or some such) with Rosses.
The Ross was reputedly the most accurate shooting sniper rifle of World War I and some Ross fans claimed US target rules in the first decade or 15 years of the 20th century had to be rewritten to exclude Rosses from service rifle matches to give US made rifles a chance to win.
Ironically, when Canada officially dumped the Ross, the immediate problems with improper disassembly of the Mk III had been resolved. However, there were still probably primary extraction problems supposedly endemic to straight pulls.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top