best bolt action military rifle of the 20th century

[boom boom]

Did the 99 have a chrysanthemum on the back of the bolt ?

The safety on the back of the bolt in both the type 38 and type 99 was a stylized chrysanthemum. Late T99's, so called last ditch do not. Any machining operations were strictly for function at that point.

 

[boom boom]

What is You-tube? I don't pay much attention to any of the social media, I think it's stupid. Especially face book. I If I want to communicate with someone I will call them or text them. That's as far as I go with modern communication mediums.

My knowledge of Ross Rifles was gained by reading articles by accredited experts and from the Ross Rifle forum. And by talking to the great Grandson of Sir Charles Ross himself, at the 1996 NRA Show.

And by actual experience. The miss-assembled bolt problem was rarely caused by miss-assembly at all. All you had to do to replicate the condition was to pull the bolt head forward with the bolt assembled, wiggle it a little, rotate it counter clockwise and let it snap back to the UN-LOCKED position. But when you attempted to insert it back into the gun it usually refused to go in, and if you DID manage to insert it , it worked back and forth very stiffly. I doubt that very many rifles were actually blown up this way. The peening of the left rear locking lug was (is) pretty easy to diagnose, you can see it for yourself. Picture #2 shows the Ross Mk III bolt in the proper position (lower) and the dangerous position (top)

I have four Ross'. A Mk II , a Mk III , an M-10 Sporter in .280 and a parted out Mk III receiver. The Mk III, which was pretty much wasted on the outside, in contrast to its pristine bore, was the one I torture tested. After that, I refinished the stock and cleaned up the metal, which I left in the white. It is a really nice looking rifle, and It is by far the most accurate bolt action rifle I have ever owned. Sub MOA groups out to three hundred yards are to be expected. It has a 31" barrel and the sighting radius is a full 36" with the finely adjustable rear aperture rear sight. Pic #1 shows the gun today.

If you find a Ross, the only one that really had a bad rep was the Mk I. Several unexplained blow-ups attributed to poor materials and faulty heat treat. But my rule of thumb has always been this:

If it looks like it has fired a zillion rounds.......it probably has.. Go ahead and shoot it, its probably just fine....

Tark,
Thanks for the pictures of the Ross and specifically for the bolt head. Lends context to what McBride said about the rifles in his book and other postings on forums. On my list for future acquisition to represent Canadien rifles in the Great War. Cheers.

 

[fpgt72]

So sorry sir, but I am trying to determine what was said here. Ross rifles do not "Unlock and pound you" I don't know of any rifle that does.



And you need to take some more spelling lessons, and history as well. The BOER war was long over by the time the Mk III was fielded, so I assume you are referring to the long range accuracy the Mk III was famous for. It might have served well in that war. Lot of long range shooting. BTW, you should capitalize the word Ross. Proper name, you know....

I would love to do more research! Why don't you send me a book, or a website, or a magazine article, or a post on the Ross Rifle Forum....Anything....that I haven't already seen. If you can, PM me and I'll send you a crisp, new, $100 bill. But I doubt you will be able to, there is a pretty limited amount of material out there. Not to brag, but I think I've seen just about all of it.

Bottom line is that YOU need to research a bit more.

You are a legend in your own mind.....do you want to insult my mother now.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

What is You-tube? I don't pay much attention to any of the social media, I think it's stupid. Especially face book. I If I want to communicate with someone I will call them or text them. That's as far as I go with modern communication mediums.

My knowledge of Ross Rifles was gained by reading articles by accredited experts and from the Ross Rifle forum. And by talking to the great Grandson of Sir Charles Ross himself, at the 1996 NRA Show.

And by actual experience. The miss-assembled bolt problem was rarely caused by miss-assembly at all. All you had to do to replicate the condition was to pull the bolt head forward with the bolt assembled, wiggle it a little, rotate it counter clockwise and let it snap back to the UN-LOCKED position. But when you attempted to insert it back into the gun it usually refused to go in, and if you DID manage to insert it , it worked back and forth very stiffly. I doubt that very many rifles were actually blown up this way. The peening of the left rear locking lug was (is) pretty easy to diagnose, you can see it for yourself. Picture #2 shows the Ross Mk III bolt in the proper position (lower) and the dangerous position (top)

I have four Ross'. A Mk II , a Mk III , an M-10 Sporter in .280 and a parted out Mk III receiver. The Mk III, which was pretty much wasted on the outside, in contrast to its pristine bore, was the one I torture tested. After that, I refinished the stock and cleaned up the metal, which I left in the white. It is a really nice looking rifle, and It is by far the most accurate bolt action rifle I have ever owned. Sub MOA groups out to three hundred yards are to be expected. It has a 31" barrel and the sighting radius is a full 36" with the finely adjustable rear aperture rear sight. Pic #1 shows the gun today.

If you find a Ross, the only one that really had a bad rep was the Mk I. Several unexplained blow-ups attributed to poor materials and faulty heat treat. But my rule of thumb has always been this:

If it looks like it has fired a zillion rounds.......it probably has.. Go ahead and shoot it, its probably just fine....

Says the guy posting on a internet forum

 

[tark]

You are a legend in your own mind.....do you want to insult my mother now.

No, I do not. I am sure she is a beautiful and charming lady , but I can't seem to figure YOU out.

I am at a loss to understand your venom towards me.....but if it makes you feel good....go ahead and wallow in it.

 

[Sistema1927]

Really High Road guys.

 

[tark]

I'm not the one that hurled the first insult.

 

[lysanderxiii]

What is You-tube? I don't pay much attention to any of the social media, I think it's stupid. Especially face book. I If I want to communicate with someone I will call them or text them. That's as far as I go with modern communication mediums.

My knowledge of Ross Rifles was gained by reading articles by accredited experts and from the Ross Rifle forum. And by talking to the great Grandson of Sir Charles Ross himself, at the 1996 NRA Show.

And by actual experience. The miss-assembled bolt problem was rarely caused by miss-assembly at all. All you had to do to replicate the condition was to pull the bolt head forward with the bolt assembled, wiggle it a little, rotate it counter clockwise and let it snap back to the UN-LOCKED position. But when you attempted to insert it back into the gun it usually refused to go in, and if you DID manage to insert it , it worked back and forth very stiffly. I doubt that very many rifles were actually blown up this way. The peening of the left rear locking lug was (is) pretty easy to diagnose, you can see it for yourself. Picture #2 shows the Ross Mk III bolt in the proper position (lower) and the dangerous position (top)

I have four Ross'. A Mk II , a Mk III , an M-10 Sporter in .280 and a parted out Mk III receiver. The Mk III, which was pretty much wasted on the outside, in contrast to its pristine bore, was the one I torture tested. After that, I refinished the stock and cleaned up the metal, which I left in the white. It is a really nice looking rifle, and It is by far the most accurate bolt action rifle I have ever owned. Sub MOA groups out to three hundred yards are to be expected. It has a 31" barrel and the sighting radius is a full 36" with the finely adjustable rear aperture rear sight. Pic #1 shows the gun today.

If you find a Ross, the only one that really had a bad rep was the Mk I. Several unexplained blow-ups attributed to poor materials and faulty heat treat. But my rule of thumb has always been this:

If it looks like it has fired a zillion rounds.......it probably has.. Go ahead and shoot it, its probably just fine....

The Ross Mk III and M-10 (being essentially the same rifle) both can have the bolt assembled wrong. Having owned an unmodified one and having seen it done on both. With the Mk III/M-10, all you have to do to "install" it wrong is disassemble the bolt, it is very easy to re-assemble it wrong.

They later modified the bolt carrier with a rivet to remedy the problem. But not all of them got modified.

The other problem with the Ross is the magazine, loading it with .303 stripper clips almost assures that the rim of the first round will be behind the rim of the second.

But, yes, they are accurate rifles, and fast.

 

[lysanderxiii]

No offense Vern but your math is way off. I will reload any WWII bolt action at a 2:1 ratio to the SMLE. So if I reload a Springfield 19 times I will have only reloaded the SMLE 9. Now that is a difference.

Then you should practice more . . .

Putting one stripper clip in an SMLE should not take any longer to do than putting one stripper clip in a Mauser. And, either way, it gives you 5 rounds to shoot.

 

[tark]

The Ross Mk III and M-10 (being essentially the same rifle) both can have the bolt assembled wrong.

Quite right. As a matter of fact, the incorrectly assembled bolt in the pic was from my M-10 sporter. Where the rifles differed was in the Magazine. The M-10 Sporters is a conventional double column with a beautifully machined follower that is a work of art all by itself. And it is the smoothest working straight pull action ever made. If I put a round in the magazine and point the muzzle down, the bolt will chamber the round (but not lock) with nothing more than its own weight. A nudge with the back of my little finger will lock the bolt.

And I just discovered something! I have a 100 year old bandoleer of .303 ammo, old enough to be loaded with cordite, anyway. The stripper clips are blued steel and they are some of the slickest loading stripper clips I have ever used. I will retract my statement about Enfields being slow to load with stripper clips...and apologize to the Enfield lovers of the world! Those things load like greased lightning! All of the stripper clips I have seen were parkerized and they seem to stick. Not sure why anyone would do that..

 

[tark]

Says the guy posting on a internet forum

OH....Stop it, Jim.! LOL. To me, social media is You Tube, Twitter and Facebook. I won't say I never watched facebook, but I have never posted on it and the other two are worthless as far as I am concerned.

 

[eastbank]

while its true the enfield and the mauser would take the same amount of time to insert one clip, if involved in a firefight with both rifles topped off, you would still have five rounds in the enfield while the mauser would need a reload. and the british soldiers were not dumb and would carry spare magizines to ensert with the rifle still able to fire the one in the chamber if needed right now.. we are talking about combat rifles here. true the mausers were very well made, but were too well made for some combat senaros. take russia for instance, the 98,s froze up while the russia mosins kept firing. even in VN extra magizines were prefered to loading the 20 rounders with stripper clips. eastbank.

 

[lysanderxiii]

Only one flavor of the ross had the bolt issue. Its issues in the great war where due to it being built for the Boar war....I am sure the "great grandson" told you that...but bottom line you need to research a bit more.

No, at least two. The Mk I and the Mk III, probably the Mk II as well, as I can't see fixing the problem then going back to the bad design.

And Tark, with the Mk III you can't just flip the bolt head while assembled, maybe you can with the Mk I, but not with the Mk III

 

[lysanderxiii]

while its true the enfield and the mauser would take the same amount of time to insert one clip, if involved in a firefight with both rifles topped off, you would still have five rounds in the enfield while the mauser would need a reload. and the british soldiers were not dumb and would carry spare magizines to ensert with the rifle still able to fire the one in the chamber if needed right now.. we are talking about combat rifles here. true the mausers were very well made, but were too well made for some combat senaros. take russia for instance, the 98,s froze up while the russia mosins kept firing. even in VN extra magizines were prefered to loading the 20 rounders with stripper clips. eastbank.

Spare magazines were not issued. Show me pictures of British troops with spare magazines. If it was done, it was not a common practice.

And, changing magazines on an SMLE takes longer that inserting a clip.....try it some time.

(And Enfield magazines, not having feed lips don't hold the round very securely.)

 

[lysanderxiii]

Quite right. As a matter of fact, the incorrectly assembled bolt in the pic was from my M-10 sporter. Where the rifles differed was in the Magazine. The M-10 Sporters is a conventional double column with a beautifully machined follower that is a work of art all by itself. And it is the smoothest working straight pull action ever made. If I put a round in the magazine and point the muzzle down, the bolt will chamber the round (but not lock) with nothing more than its own weight. A nudge with the back of my little finger will lock the bolt.

And I just discovered something! I have a 100 year old bandoleer of .303 ammo, old enough to be loaded with cordite, anyway. The stripper clips are blued steel and they are some of the slickest loading stripper clips I have ever used. I will retract my statement about Enfields being slow to load with stripper clips...and apologize to the Enfield lovers of the world! Those things load like greased lightning! All of the stripper clips I have seen were parkerized and they seem to stick. Not sure why anyone would do that..

If you look closely at the way the rimmed cartridges are placed in the stripper clip, it is one round with the rim on the base of the clip, one up, ahead of the first, the middle flat again and so forth... like so:

This arrangement makes the clip reversible, unlike the Steyr-Mannlicher enbloc clip. In the double stack magazine, the rims sort themselves out reliably. However, in the single stack Rosses (the Mk III and the military M-10s) they have a tendency to go into the magazine in the order they are in the stripper clip. Which causes problems with the first round.

 

[Gun Master]

The safety on the back of the bolt in both the type 38 and type 99 was a stylized chrysanthemum. Late T99's, so called last ditch do not. Any machining operations were strictly for function at that point.

Exactly ! My point was that the "Mum" is the indication of a better made, and possibly more valuable rifle .

 

[boom boom]

From what I understand, Lysanderxiii is correct and R.K. Campbell also agrees in in an article of the Lee-Enfield in Small Arms Review (http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=1025)
I believe official British doctrine circa WWI is that you did not use the magazines for reloading in combat. If I recall right, I believe that one spare magazine was issued in case the other one was damaged.

It is also harder to make sure that you are avoiding rimlock if you try to load cartridges singly into a magazine not mounted in the weapon and I doubt using a stripper clip to do so works much better in that situation. It is also a bit slow to switch out magazines and lock them especially if the magazine is well used as Lysander mentioned above.

 

[boom boom]

Exactly ! My point was that the "Mum" is the indication of a better made, and possibly more valuable rifle .

Certainly, early war T99's are better made than later ones and usually go for more. While they are a Mauser derivative, until the last stages of the war, they were well made serviceable weapons. These earlier Arisakas are also be easier to sporterize unless you like trying to polish out all kinds of machine tool marks. You will also find chrome lined bores in the earlier T99's which is nice if you like to shoot them. The midwar ones are a bit more simple but nowhere near as rough as last ditch.

Last ditch and training rifles which should not be fired under any circumstances are where the Arisaka probably got its bad reputation.
The last ditch are strictly for collectors that like examples of that type and similar in that respect to the last ditch type Mausers in Germany. They are rough in appearance but a few like to shoot them perhaps for the thrill of it. I find the actions in mine (have T99's and T38's) are quite smooth and the safety is easy to apply compared with the Mosin (the chrysanthemum on the bolt is actually functional for gripping purposes as the Japanese apparently used the heel of their palm to rotate the safety off and on). It is a lot easier to apply and take off safe that way rather than pushing in with fingers and trying to rotate it.

 

[tark]

No, at least two. The Mk I and the Mk III, probably the Mk II as well, as I can't see fixing the problem then going back to the bad design.

And Tark, with the Mk III you can't just flip the bolt head while assembled, maybe you can with the Mk I, but not with the Mk III

Interesting. With my parted out Mk III action, you CAN flip it in the manner I mentioned, but I cannot with my shooter Mk III !! Obviously, not all Mk IIIs were identical....but we knew that already! With My M-10 sporter it is easy to render the bolt dangerous without disassembling it.

That the Ross rifle, any Mk, had design problems is a matter of history. Sir Charles would have been diagnosed today with a bad case of ADHD. He never stopped inventing long enough to perfect what he had invented, and this was his greatest shortcoming. But he left behind rifles that had enormous successes ( The sporting rifles were universally praised, by no less than Jack O'conner) while the military rifles had equally enormous flaws. They are interesting pieces of history at the very least.

 

[eastbank]

the picture i saw was in a surpluse rifle magizine and it was of several soldiers in ww-1 with the extra magizines, lord knows there would have been many rifles laying around after a battle for the living to pick up several magizines. and you miss the main point, you have ten rounds ready to fire by working the bolt with out stopping to load. and i have changed magizines many times on enfields, you grasp the rifle with your hand and press the magizine release with your trigger finger and pull the magizine out with the other. if you have 50 trained soldiers opposing each other, one group having enfields and the other mausers the enfield group will be able to fire 500 rounds while the mausers only 250 rounds before reloading. ask any combat veteran what rifle they would choose. i have several enfields that i shoot quite a lot. eastbank.

 

[tark]

Certainly, early war T99's are better made than later ones and usually go for more. While they are a Mauser derivative, until the last stages of the war, they were well made serviceable weapons. These earlier Arisakas are also be easier to sporterize unless you like trying to polish out all kinds of machine tool marks. You will also find chrome lined bores in the earlier T99's which is nice if you like to shoot them. The midwar ones are a bit more simple but nowhere near as rough as last ditch.

Last ditch and training rifles which should not be fired under any circumstances are where the Arisaka probably got its bad reputation.
The last ditch are strictly for collectors that like examples of that type and similar in that respect to the last ditch type Mausers in Germany. They are rough in appearance but a few like to shoot them perhaps for the thrill of it. I find the actions in mine (have T99's and T38's) are quite smooth and the safety is easy to apply compared with the Mosin (the chrysanthemum on the bolt is actually functional for gripping purposes as the Japanese apparently used the heel of their palm to rotate the safety off and on). It is a lot easier to apply and take off safe that way rather than pushing in with fingers and trying to rotate it.

Depends on what you mean by "last Ditch" The substitute Standard rifles were cheapened up considerably, the chrome bores were eliminated, a lot of metal was eliminated (wooden butt plates, simpler sights, no monopods or aircraft sights, BUT these guns still had to pass proof. They were not unsafe to fire. They are often called last ditch rifles but that is not a proper description. I have one that shoots quite well. It would make a very effective weapon.

The training rifles were another story. Easiest way to tell the difference is this: If the upper tang is integral to the receiver , it is cast. Do not fire.

 

[zb338]

I admire the French greatly, but when it comes to French guns I keep thinking
of what the old Gunny says "If it's French, deepen the trench".

Zeke

 

[boom boom]

Depends on what you mean by "last Ditch" The substitute Standard rifles were cheapened up considerably, the chrome bores were eliminated, a lot of metal was eliminated (wooden butt plates, simpler sights, no monopods or aircraft sights, BUT these guns still had to pass proof. They were not unsafe to fire. They are often called last ditch rifles but that is not a proper description. I have one that shoots quite well. It would make a very effective weapon.

The training rifles were another story. Easiest way to tell the difference is this: If the upper tang is integral to the receiver , it is cast. Do not fire.

Tark,
I agree that many of the substitute models could be safe to fire if a qualified gunsmith takes a look at it but even the heat treatment and steel quality used due to Allied bombing and submarine campaigns started to suffer late in 1944 and 1945. Depending on who you believe, proof testing became either optional or was dropped at some point. Depending on which factory was involved, the substitute rifle became the emergency use rifle and you have to know what you are looking in order to tell regarding sights etc. You also get into school rifles and the like which sometimes used condemned army weapons (look for a restamped 00 prefix) which appear normal at an outside glance. Some training rifles lack rifling in the bores and apparently there was a weird Japanese navy variant t99 that used a cast iron receiver. The variety of Arisaka variants floating around is good for collectors but for those that like to shoot their acquisitions can present problems.

On an open board, that deals with general shooters, I generally err on the side of caution as I do in real life. Those with experience in such matters are often educated about the issues and can make a good risk assessment based on their knowledge and experience. Experts also know where to find answers and whether the answers found especially on the internet are credible because they have a separate base of knowledge to evaluate the claim. Someone new to these rifles could get confused and fire one that is not safe.

For other readers, here is a forum posting from some knowledgeable people about the Arisaka issue: http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?337978-last-ditch-rifles-are-they-dangerous
Castle Thunder has a lot of info on Arisakas and identification http://www.castle-thunder.com/index.htm
And search the internet using google for military surplus threads involving a commenter going by riceone (now apparently deceased) who was the rcmodel of Arisakas.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

OH....Stop it, Jim.! LOL. To me, social media is You Tube, Twitter and Facebook. I won't say I never watched facebook, but I have never posted on it and the other two are worthless as far as I am concerned.

I am as old fashioned as you are, don't care about Twitter (sounds gay to me) or face book but there are many cool things on you tube. Where else can you see someone run a belt trough his MG 42?

 

[fpgt72]

Wow...I missed out on a lot, not sure why I did not get notices of the thread being updated....I got others.

If you ever have a chance to try out a MAS36 in good shape and that was not messed up and changed to 308 do it. They are really very good rifles. I would not think twice about taking one to battle with me.

And yes there are some very good information on Youtube.....some people that don't know beans, but some good stuff.