Looking for a Ross...which one to get?

[Gary D]

nice finds. Metal bits for the M10 shouldn't be too hard to find even if it means a donor rifle.

[Gustro79]

As stated above, The Mk II** or Mk III with the heavier barrels can be fantastic shooters.
The other military Mk IIs with the coarse left hand threaded, thin profiled barrels are not usually overly accurate.

I just shot the 1905 today. I was able to get a little 100yd range time in after work but before it got dark.

Sooo what's this about the thin 1905 barrels not being accurate?? I was rather blown away by its accuracy, especially considering the following factors:

1. It was low light. It was hard to get a consistent sight picture.

2. I was using factory PPU ammo with the intention of fire-forming brass.

3. The trigger is pretty stiff and probably needs to be cleaned up a bit.

I shot two groups, a 10 shot and a 5 shot. In the 10-shot group 8 of them are inside of 1.5". The two flyers are almost certainly me or the ammo. The 5 shot group is still good but a bit less impressive as the light got very low.

One very notable thing was the very minimal case stretch compared to Enfields. That blew me away.

I can't wait to try my neck-sized hand loads in good light after cleaning up the trigger assembly. And the expectations have certainly been raised on the 1910!!!

Just awesome rifles.

[Gustro79]

I just shot the 1905 today. I was able to get a little 100yd range time in after work but before it got dark.

Sooo what's this about the thin 1905 barrels not being accurate?? I was rather blown away by its accuracy, especially considering the following factors:

1. It was low light. It was hard to get a consistent sight picture.

2. I was using factory PPU ammo with the intention of fire-forming brass.

3. The trigger is pretty stiff and probably needs to be cleaned up a bit.

I shot two groups, a 10 shot and a 5 shot. In the 10-shot group 8 of them are inside of 1.5". The two flyers are almost certainly me or the ammo. The 5 shot group is still good but a bit less impressive as the light got very low.

One very notable thing was the very minimal case stretch compared to Enfields. That blew me away.

I can't wait to try my neck-sized hand loads in good light after cleaning up the trigger assembly. And the expectations have certainly been raised on the 1910!!!

Just awesome rifles.https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...45842e77-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...02778680-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...88a8f2bc-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...43f56eef-1.jpg

Correction on case stretching: the body of the brass shows almost no stretch but the shoulder moved forward and the neck opened up considerably.

[Ax.303]

Wait to you shoot the Mk III. If everything is as it should be, it will be twice as good.

[Ax.303]

yes that is an excellent point. With British proofs it would not likely be one of the Canadian WWII rifles although it may appear the same. Canadian WWII ones would not have british proofs and be more likely to have CRB or PRY. I didn't notice that originally, I agree Joe is likely wrong on this one. As for the scrubbed stock I wouldn't hang my hat on that either way as I would actually be more surprised if an armoury would leave those on in a FTR come WWII of a WWI rifle.

A couple of members here (smellie and buffdog) did some research a while back, and were reasonably sure that CRB PLY and PHAB markings found on Rosses referred to Royal Marine bases in England.

PLY would have been issued to Royal Marines at Plymouth, CRB at Crombe and PHAB for Priddies Hard.

It`s not very likely that any rifle with these markings was in use by the Canadian Rangers in WW II.

[Gustro79]

Wait to you shoot the Mk III. If everything is as it should be, it will be twice as good.

Got the 1910 together and took it out to the frozen range today. 5 degrees, which paid tribute to the rifle's heritage.
I loaded up a RANDOM load: 174gr hpbt over 43gr IMR4350. (I read that the 180 grain flat base is the way to go. I have those on order and haven't received them yet.)
My first and only 10 shot group with this load did not disappoint. 8 of 10 are inside of 1.3", 9 of 10 inside 1.75" and 2" total if you count my "flyer." It was also low light. I am impressed.
I look forward to shooting in warmer conditions in better light after some load development. This looks like it is capable of regular 1.5" 10-shot groups which is right there with my swedes.

I shot the 1905 a bit also and it it also QUITE accurate. Side note: what is with the lack of stripper clip guide on the 1905? How are you supposed to load it quickly?

[mr.e moose]

With the 1905 push the Harris lever down and drop 5 loose rounds in, can't get much easier than that.

[Gustro79]

With the 1905 push the Harris lever down and drop 5 loose rounds in, can't get much easier than that.

No rim lock?

[tiriaq]

Just bounce the Harris paddle to settle the rounds. Rim lock doesn't seem to be a problem.

[Surpmil]

They are both probably capable of sub MOA with the right ammo. They were just that kind of rifle. Hesketh Prichard wrote home about making a clover leaf with a MkIII offhand at 100 yards. He was an exceptionally good shot of course. He called it a fluke, but it wasn't.

Read "In the Trenches, 1914-1918" if you want an unvarnished account of the Ross in action.