I picked up Ross straight pull in 303 a while back at the pawn shop. Believe it is a model 1910 -- whatever the second model is, that is what I have. I has been sporterized. The action is slick. but the bore is the worst I have ever seen and someone hogged out the chamber so that the brass comes out looking like something by Weatherby. A guy told this was done during WWI on a lot of rifles to improve extraction and feeding in dirty conditions.
At any rate, any of you all ever rebarrel one of these rifles? Do you know anyone who has? I was thinking it would be a good 30-40 krag candidate or maybe a 25-35 I could use with spitzers. Rifle has one slick action.

Just about any good metalsmith can do it for you.

Was there a particular reason you were getting away from the .303? I think more game around the world has been killed with that round than any other. I am building one for myself right now. BUT...I am a firm believer in getting what you want, so it is not a .303 that is 100% OK too!

I commend you on going with the Ross action. Those are quite classey and not seen just every day. And as you mention, they are usually butter-smooth. A great sporting action that was not really cut out for the demands of trench warfare, but great for a hunter. I want to build a Ross for myself one day too!

PM sent was well.

There was a gunsmith (his name was Jennings, now passed away) in Winnipeg who converted the Ross rifle to left-hand, and did a beautiful job of it. I would love to have one, if anyone has 1 available, or knows of 1.
Alex

Does yours have the two-lug bolt head, or the multi-lug (screw type) bolt head? As I recall, the Models 1905 and 1905/'07 had the two lug bolt heads, while the various versions of the M 1910 had the multi-lug bolts. It was the M1910's, I believe, which suffered the jamming problems in WW I.

Part of the problems there were the precise fit of the bolt, and design of the bolt-stop but according to the documents I have seen, including a letter from the Commander-in-Chief of the entire Home-Country & Commonwealth sector of the front, the majority of the problem was caused by oversized ammunition manufactured for and issued by the British to both U.K. troops and troops from the colonies which formed the Commonwealth (of which Canada was one).

Roger Phillips who was my neighbor in Regina, Saskatchewan, co-authored the definitive book on Rosses and their history. To a limited extent, I can probably look up answers to at least some of the questions you may have on Ross rifles, in his book. (Roger and I used to go to gun shows together, and he was a very fine, honest, and knowledgeable man.)

Anyway, I carried one of the 1905/07 model .303 "carbines" for years as a "canoe" gun, and never had any feeding, extraction, or other problems with it, despite it often being used in conditions which left it filthy. For the $13 I paid for it at a Red Deer, Alberta auction, I couldn't have asked for a better field-use gun.

happen to have a pic-

That's my kind of stock!!
Good looking rifle.

I had to go and look at my rifle. It is a 1905. Could have sworn I saw 1910 last time I looked at it. Dual lug. That is a beautiful piece of wood in the pictured rifle. Is that book available for purchase anywhere? Something I might like to purchase.

get it while it's hot-

The Book

and-

The Book Again

The book to which I was referring is apparently A MUCH LARGER one...hard bound, 8-1/2" X 11", 475 pages. Contains everything a person mght want to know about Sir Ross, his rifles, even the floor plans of the various levels in his family castle "Balnagowan Castle".

It was written by Roger Phillips, F.Dupuis, and J.Chadwick, published in 1984, and is titled "The Ross Rifle Story". I believe it was privately published, so it may be hard to find a copy, as I don't know how many there actually were. I would start looking at the Abe Books site, if I wanted another copy.

Neat thing is, it contains actual copies of much of the correspondence between the War departments of Canada and Great Britain regards the performance of the Ross in combat and where responsibility for any shortfalls may lie. Even the Brits said the bottom line was that the Canadian troops were inadvertantly issued ammo which was intended for use in the Lee-Enfield. The Lee-Enfield intentionally had somewhat oversize chambers so as to function reliably with ammo made by inexperienced manufacturers in Britain and the colonies, and which therefore was often oversize in measurements. There is much more to it than might meet the eye, but that is the way the failure of the rifles in trench use is explained by investigative bodies in both War Departments. (The Canadians had shipped adequate amounts of their own ammo, which was correctly dimensioned for the Ross, to England before they sailed. But, as snafus occur in all wars, that ammo was just thrown in with the whole Commonwealth's supplies, rather than issued to the Canadians.)

Anyway, am glad to hear you have a 1905 model. Those were/are pretty good rifles generally.

there was an extensive article in the Gun Digest, 60-70's, on the Ross also- maybe it can be located.

I have a Ross 1905 in .35WCF, they were made that way, bore is bad, so I am going to see if can be rebored to .405WCF.