Ross Mk III Sniping Model Barrel lengths?

Hi all,

I was wondering if shorter-than-standard, cut-down barrels were ever used on those Rosses that were scoped and issued to battalion snipers, or were they all the standard length barrels? I wouldn't mind mocking one of these up from a sporterized Mark III that has already been abused by bubba.

Any of the "stripped" rifles I have seen, or have seen photos of, have the full-length barrels intact.

Ross was very careful with crowning and I think the only reason a barrel might be cut back would be if the crown had been damaged. Also, the commonly-held theory back then was that you needed a long barrel in order to have accuracy. As well, this is what the technology of the time could support; the day of the short/fat/superstiff barrel was still a long way in the future, far enough that it is still a bone of contention with benchrest shooters today.

If I were to build up a head-turner Ross from a Bubba Special, I think what I would want would be a Ross Short Rifle Mark III. This factory prototype had a 26-inch tube IIRC, otherwise was stocked-up like a regular Mark III, same amount of barrel left free at the muzzle and so forth. It would have been a nice-looking rifle and eminently serviceable.

Lots of Rosses got bobbed to 26 inches and that's nice because it leaves you with essentially a heavy-barreled rifle. You can replace the rear-sight mount (4 tiny screws) with a flat-top commercial model and drill and tap that; then you have only to drill and tap TWO holes in the receiver ring. Replace the military rearsight base and you're back to an ironsight rifle.

Just be very careful what Bubba'd rifle you are starting with. We are learning more about some of these all the time: just in the last year some light has been shed on the PLY, CRB and PHAB markings from the RN and RMLI: rifles which were sportered in England and dumped HERE. Add to that what "black light" has brought out with some sanded woodwork and things are starting to get plain interesting.

But a Rifle, Ross, Short, Mark III(T). It was never built, but just perhaps it should have been.

Good luck.... and be sure to post a range report.
.

Thanks very much for the advice. I would be looking for a bubba'd rifle that was already drilled-and-tapped, as I feel a little strange about doing that to any piece of milsurp, even if it is already mutilated (this probably makes me a weirdo, but whatever).

I had another question: Hesketh-Prichard makes it quite clear in his book that mid-to-late war sniping doctrine called for the use of the telescopic sight, but I have read many accounts of open-sighted Rosses being used to snipe. This makes me wonder where this overlap occurred -- are these strictly early-war rifles, before the CEF switched to the Lee Enfield, being used to snipe simply in the hands of talented infantrymen as opposed to dedicated scout-observer-snipers, or were there open-sighted Rosses retained for use by the S.O.S. specialists late into the war?

I'm just getting into this whole business of the Ross right now, so I still find details like these confusing. I have a copy of "In The Trenches" and "The Ross Rifle Story" on order, and am desperately trying to source a copy of "A Rifleman Went to War," but not having read any of these so far, I've basically only gleaned what information I can find in some forum posts here and on the Ross Rifle forum.

Here's an MKL entry that may be of interest ... ;)

1915 M10 Ross MkIII* Sniper Rifle Serial #223

Regards,
Doug

Not all the WWI Ross Sniper rifles had a scope mounted on them. Some were simply modified and used without a scope.

In many cases, the German trenches were very close to the British ones. Lots of them were less than 100 yards, and sometimes as close as 30 yards. In these conditions, an open sighted rifle would be a lot faster to use to pick up your target.

Another reason for cutting down the fore end wood might have been concealment. A slim rifle barrel would have been a lot harder to see and locate than one that had a more visible wood forestock. Also, many Sniper Hides had small openings and loop holes, just enough to shoot through. A larger opening could admit enemy bullets and injure a Sniper.

If you go on E-Bay and use the search function, there is a company in the southern United States that has reprinted a lot of the Classic books, including McBrides accounts of Machine Guns and Sniping, along with Heskith-Pritchards book. Sorry I don't know the name, but I ordered some books from them a while ago.
.

From the surviving photos it appears almost all the Ross MkIII rifles fitted with Winchester A5 scopes had the barrels cut behind the front sight. I assume this was done due to the sight blocking the scope's field of view somewhat.

One might wonder why the front sight base was not simply removed instead, but perhaps the barrels were felt to be unnecessarily long in any case. Thinking about it, perhaps it was the end of the barrel itself that interfered with the field of view, particularly when the scope was adjusted for longer ranges.

There is only one photo I have seen of a MkIII with the Warner & Swasey scope that has a cut barrel, and it may be that this was simply editing of the photo for the book it appears in. ("Without Warning")

If you are interested in Ross and/or Canadian sniper rifles. Do your self a favour and find a copy of Without Warning by Clive Law.

Amazon also has reprints of the Herb Mcbride books buffdog mentions. His book A Rifleman Went To War is especially good. You might want to get the Emma Gees as well. It is usually under $10 and worth reading.

You have a good start though. I really like In the Trenches because, not only is it a great book, but I know the author Glenn personally and I own the M-10 .280 Ross Frank Iriam used to hunt with for most of his life.

And The Ross Rifle Story is simply the best source of info on anything and everything Ross you will find anywhere.

A point to remember is that there were only the 500 Rosses mounted with the Warner & Swayze scope and they were done in 2 batches of 250 rifles apiece.

I would think that the bulk of actual sniping was done with unscoped rifles.

A friend and myself took a pair of Rosses into a modern 'practical' type of match several years ago. Rules required 2-man teams, iron sights only, ANY firearm, UNLIMITED ammo if you could carry it to the trench you were supposed to shoot from. We had DA 426, one of the rifles off the old HMS CANADA, and another full-length rifle which had had the wood obscenely bobbed but the barrel unmutilated. We were the ONLY team shooting 2 bolt rifles: EVERY other team had at least one semi-auto or full-auto firearm, usually both. A couple of teams were using a combination of C-7 and Minimi and there was everything you can think of on the firing-line: FAL, M-1, M14, G-3, M-16, even a Bren. The course of fire was 40 steels of various sizes from cigarette-pack size (80 yards) to 24 inches, arranged on rolling ground with LOTS of dead ground: an 18 at 300 yards and a 24 at 400 looked side-by-side! Ten-minute time limit, too, just to add a touch of stress. We cleared the course in just over 8 minutes, 36 rounds apiece: 55% hits, which we thought not too terrible. And, of course, as with any match at CFB Shilo, the course of fire was changed AFTER people signed up. Match had been advertised as 100 to 400 yards, turned out to be 80 yardsto 540 METRES: just short of 600. Best series of the match was mine, 6 rounds on the 6 smoke-pack targets at 85 yards, very rapid. Best shot of the match as my buddy's final shot: standing on the footboard at the bottom of the trench, Ross resting ABOVE his shoulder and MY last round of HXP up the spout, he took the 540-metre plate which was hiding behind a BUSH. I then took the STOP plate with a handload. At the next match, another Ross came out. They are now a fairly common sight at re-enactment shoots around here but, when we turned out for this shoot, most of the guys had no idea what kind of rifle we were shootng.

BTW, we were in 10th place out of 23 teams, having beaten out two teams using the C-7/Minimi combo.

Rifles were smoking when they came off the firing-line but still working smoothly. So much for the story that a Ross jams up when it gets hot! We had ZERO jams, ZERO misfeeds, ZERO bolt blowbacks, ZERO stuck bolts, ZERO rifles needing to be kicked open. PERFECT performance.

I think it is fair to say that a stripped Ross, or a full-wood Ross, would make rather an excellent sniping rifle, just the way it is.

But I might be biased.
.

Were they LC Rosses or unmutilated?

DA 426 is exactly the way it came from the Chilean Navy. I stripped it and cleaned it when I got it (1976), but nothing else. It is a 16th Battalion rifle and has an unusual serial number: A 1625, so it likely is one of the very few made in 1913. Barrel is the original 30.5 inches, trigger is like silk and it does 2-shot hunter/sniper groups at 100 that touch, given tat you feed it what it likes. Just about the best 99 bucks I think I ever shelled out. It does have the LC marking for a Large Cone chamber but the job was done carefully, the brass exhibits uniform expansion except for a very small upward bulge just forward of the rim, quite unlike some which throw out grotesquely-expanded casings. Defence Industries brass in this rifle has lasted 14 firings, so far. Have to take her out again this season, make it 15 or 16. Still no stretch: locks up nice and tight!

The other rifle also had a full-length barrel, but that's all I can say for it. The woodwork had been sanded mercilessly and bobbed behind the middle band, so no history possible on that one. It is, though, definitely of later manufacture, as it has the factory E for Enlarged chamber. It, also, was done well and there is no trouble with the brass.

If you want to see REALLY deformed brass, look at what comes out of some of the very early 1905s!

Hope this answers your query.
.