Printable View
I just traded an SKS for a Ross rifle, but I'm not sure which one it is. The front band is closer to the receiver than the 1905's I've seen on here and the butt is shaped differently, more sharp lines than flowing like the others.
What are points to ook at to identify an 03?
I prtomise to put up good pictures when the rifle is in my hands in a week or so. Its sportered also.
Thanks AGB-1!
Looks like it is a 1903. I have crappy cell phone pics I will post tonight. The rear sight is the same as the top rifle, wood is cut off right at the band, looks like bubba put a Lee-Enfild front sight on it.
---------- Post added at 03:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------
Are there any safety concerns with the 03's like the other Ross's? Would you guys shoot one? If I do decide to shoot it I'll have it inspected by a good smith of coarse.
Here are the cell phone pics he sent me
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0247-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0246-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0245-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0237-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0236-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_0235-1.jpg
I suspect that you don't have a 1903, but rather a Mk I*. Firstly, in the book "The Ross Rifle Story" it lists the 1903's as having 26" barrels. Yours appears to be the longer 28" of the MkI and MkI*, only your measurement can confirm that. Next, on page 168 of the same book it shows pictures of both rifles(MkI and MkI*), and yours has the Ross MkII rear sight that is correct for the MkI*. Your pictures make it diffficult to discern but the front sight may be correct, just missing the hood and screws. As you noted the stock has been "sporterized", however the top handguard appears correct for the MkI*. Very nice find, I think worth restoring though perhaps the bayonet lug piece may prove difficult. I would trade SKS's for these any time. Regards. Tom
From the book:
Model: MkI* (second pattern)
Caliber: .303 British
Barrel Length: 28 in.
Magazine Capacity: 5 Rounds
Rearsight: Ross MkII
"This rifle was the result of problems with the MkI and recommendations made by the SSAC to the factory." "The rear sight is the Ross MkII (H.L. Bock patent)." "The Ross MkI* was the result of a conversion of MkI, Ross's by the replacement of MkI and MkI* rearsights with the MkII."
Try on The Ross Rifle Forum.AGB-1
Thanks for the replies! Looks like I best be buying a book. The Ross Rifle Story is the best on them?
I will see if I can find the site and have a look around thanks again!
Oldpaul, it has a barrel date of 1905, its marked on the butt as well. I have a really long drive for work this morning or would post the pics right now but I really want to go get started on cleaning her a bit.
The rifling is VERY strong. Stock cartouches are strong as well. It has a decent coat of pigeon sh*t on the wood and the metal and bore are filthy. There are quite a few small bits missing, most shouldn't affect its firing ability or safety. The rear sight leaf has broken off the arm at some point and needs repair, they tried to epoxy it on. Wood is in great shape as well, no cracks and actually feels moist. The metal below the woodline has no rust or pitting at all.
From the Ross Forum.AGB-1http://www.rossrifle.com/
I'd really like to join that site but it won't let me register, says registration is deactivated...Quote:
Originally Posted by AGB-1
Never mind I figured out why, figured it must have been something like that. See you over there!
Here's the updated pictures after a thorough cleaning. Bore has strong rifling but the grooves are just pitted enough to be rough and dark. maybe with any luck it will improve with some shooting? Wishful thinking I bet...
Stock turned out great. Love the colors! Should have worn gloves for the photos, the streaks are from me.
Having some good luck on parts too, see how things go in the coming weeks! Have some good leads and some awesome new contacts. Thanks to everyone who has helped with this!
Think I'll take it to Corelane's and see if there gunsmith is confident that he can solder that rear sight back together. If he has any doubts at all I'll wait to find someone who is 100% sure. I really like that shop and I'm sure they will do a fine job, they build rifles for a living after all!
What are you guys' opinions on the blueing on the barrel? The original blue under the rear hanguard is beautiful and bright. Wondering if I shouldn't just take paint stripper to that soft chipped ugly black paint on the barrel and have a pro reblue the barrel. Also had rust blueing suggested too.
Did a quick function test with a .303 snap cap, the magazine won't feed and the rifle extracts but does not eject. Any ideas?
Here's the pics:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1663-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1664-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1665-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1666-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1667-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1669-1.jpg
Springs on the feed and eject problem.AGB-1
AGB-1, load problem was the meat behind the buttplate. Mag cut off was activated. Figured that out. Ejector spring is broken upon closer look.
This is exactly the kin of find that those of us without a great deal of $$$ hope for!
Restoration of the wood will be relative easy; hardest part will be trying to find a matching piece or Romanian walnut. Hopefully, something else might be matched.
The rifle is definitely a late Mark I; I have a Mark II here with the serial number only 2 letter-groups away. It is marked 1906.
I have been in touch with Flying Pig via PMs since this topic first arose.
Personally, I would like to know how it shoots!
.
Smellie, full range report on its way as soon as I get a handle on that back sight issue, dust cover screw and ejector spring. Once the planets align it will be headed out with a variety of loads. Was thinking I'd try Sierra 174 match kings and maybe pro hunter 180s. Do the Rosses perefer flat based bullets too? Should I load light or just do a normal ladder test? Can't wait to see what this old beauty will do, lot better than its young shooter I bet! It hasn't had any exercise in at least a half century, I think it deserves it.
What you have is a 1903 Mk I*--someone provided the link to the photos of my 1903, which is the Mk I, first issue, with the ridiculously long and badly calibrated rear sight. That model was rapidly replaced with the Mk I*, which has the rearsight yours does, but retains the other features of the Model 1903--a heavy , shrouded bolt (which yours looks to have) which is rather hard to close gently--requires a fairly good shove to close. It also has a flat topped bolt release button, and the button type magazine cut-off switch. Yours should also have the knurled cocking piece, which is rather difficult to grab onto. I don't know if the markings on the left side of the receiver of your rifle are visible or not--you don't show them in the photos. However, they should say 1903. Your buttstock markings should also be much simpler than the later models.
The 1903 model was replaced with the 1905, but 1903's were made through 1905 and if I recall correctly into 1906, so a barrel date of 1905 on yours does not mean it is a model 1905. The 1905 is the one we more commonly run into now, with the solid bolt head, no bolt shroud, easier to close bolt, slightly rounded and ridged bolt release button, magazine cutoff removed and replaced with the Harris depressor lever system, etc, but the first 1905's maintained that rearsight which is on your rifle.
You seem to have made a damn good trade for an SKS! You have a rare rifle. Bubba did indeed take off the forewood, but that can be replaced. The barrel bands will be somewhat challenging to find, but not impossible.
Enjoy!
Ed
Sorry Edf, thought I had included the other set of photos from when it first arrived. Yes it does say 1903 on the receiver, and has all the other features you listed. Definitely a MkI*. I've sourced up most of the pieces already I think, with the exception of the magazine switch. I've found a fellow who will build a fore end. His other ones I've found pictures of look very nice. Its all coming together.
So I was able to find a replacement for one of the missing screws for the front sight hood form a CGNer. Also installed a front sight hood. I was able to retrieve the broken screw from the dust cover and replaced it. I built a new ejector spring and installed that as well. The rifle now has all of its functions back except the magazine cut off switch and I'm going to build one of those from scratch as well. Just waiting on a friend who ma have some of the other parts for me to return from a trip, and to hear from the fellow who is building the fore end extension and I should have it pretty well back to original form.
Things are looking up!
New ejector spring:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...a3c0be6e-1.jpg
Rear sight repairs my friend made.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...be9036a9-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2a4a8ee6-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...c008e508-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...fc9b3d59-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...7d00f5f1-1.jpg
Coming along just fine. Looks like you are about ready to blast off a few.
I don`t know if anyone mentioned it,
The bores on the Mk I & early Mk II Rosses are around .300.
If you are going to shoot it lots, you might want to make up some cast loads for this one. Or maybe neck down a bit for .308 bullets.
Let us know how you make out.
Yes it's pretty much ready. My plan is to shoot it at the Ross shoot next month, being a special occasion and all!
I have put 10 rds of factory PRVI through it already with no pressure signs etc but I do want to enjoy this old girl not destroy her so I better do some measuring.
Thanks a bunch again for the photos of the ejector spring, it was a huge help.
Glad I to help.
Let us know what you find.
These rifles were regulated to the Mk VI round that used the 215gr roundnose bullet at about 2050fps. I've used factory 174's and the Sierra 180's and they shoot fine. They print a lot lower on the target though. Mine was 3 feet low at 200m on the 200yd setting. I had to build a new front sight for my 1905 that is not much more than a dimple sticking up in order to shoot to the sights at 200. The sight picture is horrible though, so I want to try some hard cast 215gr roundnose with 30cal gas checks. They should be able to make 2050fps without leading.
Sadly, I won't be able to attend the Ross Rifle Shoot in Calgary and see all the wonderfull rifles and share tall tales with the owners. This workin' for the man thing keeps getting in the way...
Quote:
Originally Posted by flying pig
Wasn't there a company making 215 or 220 gr jacketed projectiles in .311 recently? I'll do some looking, although if memory serves me they were brutally expensive
Perhaps these? I think I paid around $35 for fifty of these but they are the only bullets that shoot accurately in one of my 1905's. They can be seated much farther out. Hornady 174gr on the left. Tom
Absolutely, those are the ones I had in mind. I think I've found a source for them as well. Have to try some in it later on. Might as well spoil it as I'll only be shooting it on special occasion.
Bashaw Sports said they could bring some in some Woodleigh 215's from a supplier in California, they said I might not like the price.. said, if they couldn't get a large enough order of various items from this supplier, and had to ship the bullets separately, they could reach 20 bucks for shipping just a couple of boxes. I was quoted around 80 bucks for 50 round box of 215 gr. I passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by flying pig
Possibly a bulk order for those of us who own Ross' might bring the price down a fair bit.
Tradex Canada lists them on their website at $38.55 per box of 50. But unfortunately they show them as out of stock.
Woodleigh bullets have a tremendous reputation amongst hunters of heavy game for fine performance. Prices are not out of line in comparison with other premium bullets considering they are made in Australia.
These .311-.312 bullets are all great if your rifle has a .303 bore.
flying pig`s rifle is more likely to be the tight .300 bore found on early Rosses.
A lot easier on that 100+ year old, can`t find parts for, rifle if you are not trying to squeeze over sized bullets down the barrel every time you pull the trigger.
If the bore diameter is .300 should I expect to find a groove diameter near .308 then?
If anyone would be willing to take measurements of an original MkI mag cut off lever for me I would really appreciate it. Also does anyone know the thread pattern for the switch?
The switch and rear sling swivel are the only pieces missing now.
Switch has been reproduced! Hopefully this is up to everyone else's standard. This was my first attempt at this type of piece and all I have is a 7x10 Harbor Freight lathe, bench grinder and hand files etc so the knurling isn't very fine and it may not have perfect dimensions and my machining looks fairly rough but it is there now and one more of the unobtainable parts has been built. The rest of the parts except the rear sling swivel and fore end extension will be here in a few more days.
I tried oil bluing for the first time on this piece as well. Other than one run over spot I think it looks ok.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...3dbc69ac-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...bfe7fa82-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2f146a99-1.jpg
Looks pretty darn good.
.308 bullets should work well in your rifle. Going a little larger with cast would be a option also.
Would cast bullets stand up in a barrel with rough grooves though? I've been thinking about getting into casting for a while but not sure I'm ready to get into it yet, it may be too much too quick.
A friend and I were actually just chatting about the .308 bullets the other day and he suggested I try some 220gr like what would have been used in a Krag. My next order I will get a box and try them out, until then she can stay parked.
Well, few years in the making but I'm happy with the results. In TRRS there is a photo of a MkI with a MkII rifle's nosecap. Legitimate enough for the Good Book then its good enough for me, so I used a MkII nosecap. I built a new fore end and doweled it on. I tried using a different technique for staining this one because I wanted the color to closely match. Obviously it'll take me a while to fill the pores in the wood but the color is there at least. Hope you guys enjoy the results.
Before:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_1641-1.jpg
After:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...mrtuemgk-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...qgeewnq6-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...a4anivtf-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...vrxp0uau-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...niy9vurs-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...own83hya-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...0mikxia1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ruhky7hr-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...4pr1lq52-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...zkg0pukl-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...52hds9bh-1.jpg
Well done FP.
Thanks for keeping us up to date.
Quite legitimate to use a later band. The earlier ones were rather flimsy and tended to come off in bayonet practice, so many rifles were modified (often by local armourers) to have the later style band found on the Mk II***, ****, ***** variants. Nice rifle!
Ed