+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Ross Mk III M-1910 vs M-10

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size
  1. #1
    Contributing Member NORTHOF60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 09:33 PM
    Location
    Scarborough, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    128
    Local Date
    06-07-2020
    Local Time
    01:18 AM

    Ross Mk III M-1910 vs M-10

    Can anyone tell me when and why the receiver ring stamping was changed from M-1910 to M-10?
    Was this done to signify the improvement to the bolt stop, or the assumption of the firm by the Canadianicon government?
    Some do, some don't; some will, some won't; I might ...

  2. # ADS
    Friends and Sponsors
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Location
    Milsurps.Com
    Posts
    All Threads
     

  3. #2
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    Gold Mountain
    Posts
    3,138
    Local Date
    06-06-2020
    Local Time
    10:18 PM
    My personal guess without checking any secondary sources would be that Sir Charles wanted to associate the rifle more with his "M10" sporter in .280, or at least have the same receiver markings on both for production reasons. The M1910 or MkIII action was designed around the .280 round, just as the later Patt.'13 rifle was designed around the .276 cartridge (which seems to have been pretty much a copy of .280 Ross) Ross hoped to sell his Mk.III/M10/M-1910 in .280 to the Britishicon and Dominion governments as the new "Imperial standard" to replace the Lee Enfield. There was about zero chance of that, but he was a determined sort of fellow and a Peer of the Realm...
    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." W.L.S.C..

  4. Avoid Ads - Become a Contributing Member - Click HERE
  5. #3
    Contributing Member NORTHOF60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 09:33 PM
    Location
    Scarborough, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    128
    Local Date
    06-07-2020
    Local Time
    01:18 AM
    Thread Starter
    I agree that Ross was great at self promotion (i.e.: .303 Ross), but I'm pretty sure that the model designation change took place during the war. If the Britishicon weren't going to adopt the Pattern 13 Enfield Rifleicon and .276 Enfield cartridge prior to the war for logistics reasons, the .280 Ross in the M-10 during the war was a total non starter.

    Does anyone know if the designation change is mentioned in the Ross Rifle Book? I would have thought that it would have been a certainty.
    Some do, some don't; some will, some won't; I might ...

  6. #4
    Contributing Member Ax.303's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 06:36 AM
    Location
    NW Ontario Canada
    Posts
    145
    Local Date
    06-07-2020
    Local Time
    12:18 AM
    From what I have seen the earlier Factory Sporters were marked M1910. Later ones are marked M-10.

    All the Military rifles I payed attention to are marked M-10.

    This leads me to think it was done to simplify production once Military production picked up.

  7. #5
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    Gold Mountain
    Posts
    3,138
    Local Date
    06-06-2020
    Local Time
    10:18 PM
    I can't see a few less digits in a stamp simplifying production, but one other thought occurs: change was rapid in small arms in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries and Ross may have thought it best not to have his design "dated".
    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." W.L.S.C..

  8. #6
    Member vykkagur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last On
    @
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    92
    Local Date
    06-07-2020
    Local Time
    02:18 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Surpmil View Post
    I can't see a few less digits in a stamp simplifying production, but one other thought occurs: change was rapid in small arms in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries and Ross may have thought it best not to have his design "dated".
    Now that you mention it, that's an excellent point.

  9. #7
    Contributing Member Ax.303's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 06:36 AM
    Location
    NW Ontario Canada
    Posts
    145
    Local Date
    06-07-2020
    Local Time
    12:18 AM
    More likely to have both the commercial and the military the same. This way he could use any receiver to make a Sporter.


+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Ross 1910 lllb
    By AGB-1 in forum The Ross Rifle Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-04-2019, 05:22 PM
  2. Ross 1910 nosecaps
    By HighlandGunner in forum The Ross Rifle Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-22-2015, 03:14 PM
  3. ROSS 1910 R Marker .303 Ross and LC
    By RCEMERalf in forum The Ross Rifle Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-02-2012, 01:26 PM
  4. Help with unit ID. Ross 1910
    By koldt in forum The Ross Rifle Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-20-2010, 12:43 PM
  5. Value of Ross 1910 Sporter
    By Cantom in forum The Ross Rifle Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-28-2007, 03:44 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts