Log In
November 19, 2006
Offline
Winchester (through Western Cartridge Company) manufactured .280 Ross ammunition from 1914 – 1935 with the last catalog listing occurring in 1937.
Winchester of course engaged in cartridge testing and there is lore that a “catastrophic failure” occurred with their Ross test rifle. Some of this lore has consisted of the bolt embedding in a wall, the bolt going through the roof and so on. In addition, there is lore that even suggest Winchester was not using a Ross rifle at all, but a, “prototype” action. This actually makes sense to me given E.C. Crossman’s testing demonstrated the Ross action could not be blown (even with compressed pistol powder loads combined with greasing the cases). I have not been able to find any specific documentation as to what actually happened. I have read that Winchester was attempting to duplicate as well as exceed .280 loads of the time. Perhaps somewhere, there exists further documentation?
In another recent thread, mention was made of the Ross bolt blow-out issue. This is a topic that has received a great deal of ink dating back to the WWI era. It had been a hot controversial issue.
I want to clarify that this topic is specific to the last variation of the Ross Rifle – those rifles built on the M10 action (the military version was the MkIII). This is the multi-lug action and not the early M1903 (MkI was the military version) or the various M1905 Sporting rifles (the MkII was the military version). These earlier versions were not multi-lug actions and there is no, “bolt mis-assembly” issues associated with them.
For the M-10 and MkIII actions, there were isolated reports that the bolt could be incorrectly re-assembled whereupon the lugs of the bolt head would not engage with their corresponding counterparts in the front receiver ring (i.e. they wouldn’t reach them).
Along with other Ross collectors, I’ve researched this topic a good bit. I’ve spent plenty of time manipulating Ross M-10 and MKIII bolts.
The Ross straight-pull bolt is a complicated piece of machinery. It is a basically a corkscrew screwdriver design and is spring loaded. It won’t give you bit a problem unless you take it out of the rifle. It’s not difficult to remove it from the receiver. But this is where the easiness stops.
For example, I’ve had a few frustrated calls over the years from a new M-10 owner: “how do I get the bolt back in the rifle?!
There’s a fork in the road here as far the answer. The one fork is the simple answer – “put it back in the way it came out.” And then the response is, “I can’t.” I almost always do it this way – I put it right back in the way I took it out. BUT, I don’t touch the bolt to anything. I don’t touch it to the rear of the receiver as I take it out, I don’t touch the bolt head to anything when I set it down. This is because the Ross bolt is a mouse trap. It is spring loaded. When you are baiting a mouse trap and then you set it – you are very careful when you set it down, lest it will snap shut. The Ross bolt acts the same way. It doesn’t snap shut, but the bolt head snaps back into the bolt body.
So, you grab it, pull it back out and essentially “set” it. Then you move it toward the rear of the receiver and start to insert it. If you’re new to this, you will touch the inside of the rear of the receiver and it will snap shut again. You will get frustrated. But, you will try it many times and eventually with practice and patience, you will get it. Well… if you have shaky hands, you probably will not get it.
My thoughts on the what could cause the bolt blow-back issues:
Assuming you don’t actually disassemble the bolt and then put it back together incorrectly, what could potentially happen is when you grab the bolt head to reset it – you have to pull it out and twist – and you might twist it in the opposite direction it needs to be. This will shorten the overall length of the bolt and hence, the lugs will not engage in the front receiver ring. As fellow Ross collectors as well as myself have found, it is nearly impossible to slide the bolt in when it is in the state. The bolt quickly binds. As one collector stated, “maybe I could get it in with a hammer.” I have had the same experience. However, I recall one rifle I had where I was able to slide it in (without a hammer).
The Canadian Armorers ultimately addressed this by putting a rivet in the bolt body which prevented internal twisting. The same invention was never used on commercial Mk10 sporting rifles.
So, how do you know you’re safe with your M-10 or MkIII? There’s more than one way to determine that all is well with the bolt but I think the most reassuring way is a simple virtual inspection as you are closing the bolt. If you lower your head down and look at the bolt head as it enters the front receiver ring, you can watch the lugs rotate in place as they match up with the inside of the receiver ring. You can actually watch it lock up.
The Ross story is an interesting one and I certainly agree with Bill (Zebulon) that Sir Charles was quite the character. Winchester’s experience with the .280 Ross round is intriguing – especially if the tales are true and they were attempting to hotrod and already very hot cartridge 
January 20, 2023
Offline
Thanks for the detailed description of that assembly, Steve. I think Sir Charles likely thought sportsmen too “stupid” to correctly assemble and install the bolt of his rifle deserved to get a one-shot lobotomy. A natural sorting out of the unworthy.
There was a prewar German manufactured rifle advertised for a proprietary cartridge said to be supernaturally fast. It turned out the silly numbers couldn’t be duplicated but the cartridge – which was producing very fast velocities for that day — was just a copy of the 280 Ross. The name of the firm was made up from the names of two partners.
Didn’t some of the London and Birmingham gunmakers offer their Mauser action bolt guns chambered for the 280 Ross? Westley-Richards? Holland?
Winchester would have done well to offer the Model 54 in 280 Ross, although might have dimmed the luster of the 270. I’ll bet they thought about it.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
October 14, 2024
Offline
Nice write up Steve. I had to chuckle at your mouse trap description. It is the best description of the re oved bolt assembly on a Ross. It scared the heck out of me when I first disassembled and reassemble my M1910. I really love the Ross design, and I think that the M1910 is one of the sexiest sporting rifles around.
December 9, 2002
Offline
I have to agree. A very nice, and informative, write up Steve.
Not being a Ross rifle collector, but an enthusiast just the same, you have enlightened and educated me over the past few years on the rifle and it’s design.
Tony
November 19, 2006
Offline
Zebulon said
Thanks for the detailed description of that assembly, Steve. I think Sir Charles likely thought sportsmen too “stupid” to correctly assemble and install the bolt of his rifle deserved to get a one-shot lobotomy. A natural sorting out of the unworthy.
There was a prewar German manufactured rifle advertised for a proprietary cartridge said to be supernaturally fast. It turned out the silly numbers couldn’t be duplicated but the cartridge – which was producing very fast velocities for that day — was just a copy of the 280 Ross. The name of the firm was made up from the names of two partners.
Didn’t some of the London and Birmingham gunmakers offer their Mauser action bolt guns chambered for the 280 Ross? Westley-Richards? Holland?
Winchester would have done well to offer the Model 54 in 280 Ross, although might have dimmed the luster of the 270. I’ll bet they thought about it.
Bill, Kevin and Anthony –
I’m glad my post and information was of interest. It is intriguing to consider the extent to which Winchester may have considered offering their Model 54 in the .280 Ross.
Across the pond, there were other high velocity cartridges. For example, there was the .280 Jeffery, which pushed a 140 grain bullet at 3,000 fps. This was developed by W.J. Jeffery and Co. in about 1913 and no doubt was inspired by .280 Ross ballistics which came on the scene about six years earlier. It was a rimless bottlenecked case and was based on necking the .333 Jeffery case down to .288.
The .280 Halger HV magnum came out in the mid-1920’s out of Hamburg, Germany and Halbe & Gerlich were chambering Mauser M98 rifles for it. With the agenda of avoiding paying patent royalties, they took the Ross case and necked it down to .284 and increased case capacity by about 10 water grains. This allowed them to bump up the powder charges – very likely to unsafe levels. Those powder charges probably didn’t reach advertised velocities:
100 grain at 3,900 fps
143 grain at 3,510 fps
180 grain at 3,043 fps
We already have enough skepticism that the original .280 Ross loadings reached advertised velocities. There is even more skepticism over Halger’s velocity claims. I will also note the Mauser action was not as strong as the Ross M-10 action, so safety is an even greater question mark. I have confidence Winchester gave these safety considerations serious thought as they pondered potential exotic chamberings for their M54.
November 19, 2006
Offline
It’s worth mentioning (probably just in my mind), the .275 H&H magnum. This came out in 1912 and like the Ross, used a .287 bullet. It had greater case capacity than either the Ross or the Halger but the British weren’t interested in hot-rodding it like the Germans were. They kept pressures moderate. So even though it had a larger case capacity than the Ross, velocities were very similar to the Ross.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Steve,
Can you post pictures of a WRACo 280 Ross cartridge? I have never seen one of them.
While we are on the subject of obsolete cartridges, does anyone here own a rifle chambered for the 7x61mm Sharpe & Hart cartridge? I have 4-boxes of factory new (old) Norma 7×61 S&H empty cases sitting in my reloading supply locker that need a new home (somebody that can use them).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
August 8, 2024
Offline
I read that the .280 Ross was not much of a Lion cartridge. This is according to George Grey’s account.
January 20, 2023
Offline
Steve,
Thanks for remembering the name I couldn’t — Halger. I didn’t know they had reduced groove diameter to .284. Either Phil Sharpe or somebody else got some internal ballistics tests run on the 280 Halger after the war. My understanding is (1) the published velocities were created on a typewriter; and (2) in a pressure barrel the breech pressures were hair-raising.
Like women’s skirt lengths, the popularity of various sets of external ballistics rises and falls with every generation.
Now thst I am deaf and arthritic, 7/8 ounce 12 gauge loads have become remarkably effective — something our British cousins knew when the Dodo Bird was still in season.
My father’s generation thought the 30 Govt ’06 was adequate for the big bears and anything else in America. While still in school, I’d begun to read climbing a tree was safer than hunting Grizzlies with one. A 338 Magnum was the minimum prudence demanded. (I still have no experience in such matters and have no idea. But I do know what high intensity noise did to me.)
It comforts me to know the Fearless Magnum craze started in England and Greater Deutschland (to include Austira) rather than America. If you doubt me, consider the 240 H&H Magnum and, of course, Halger but also some pretty ambitious metrics created by DWM.
Roy Weatherby and his big blasters did not come into this World sui generis. By all accounts a really nice man liked by everyone, he had a grand imagination and a child’s delight in new things. Did you know he was interested in photography, model railroading, and ham radio – as well as learning to run mills and lathes and gunsmithing in his garage? That kind of enthusiasm is infectious and with his capacity to make anyone a friend, it made him a salesman sales managers dream about.
Roy’s legacy includes my hearing loss, although Elmer Keith gets part of the blame.
I only hope the current craze for long, narrow bullets at moderate velocity with attendant mild blast and recoil, and longer barrels and suppressors, lasts long enough to spare my grandchildren their hearing.
In what time remains to me, I’m going to explore what can be done with a 6.5 x 55 Swedish Mauser cartridge in a 24″ 1-10 barrel. And whether I can throttle back a 9 pound Winchester 45-90 Model 1886 enough to.be fun to shoot.
And I’m going to burn through all the 22 long rifle ammo I can afford.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
October 14, 2024
Offline
Hi Bo. I’m sure that Steve has the answer about the George Grey incident. It is my understanding that the biggest factor in that catastrophic event had to do with bullet failure. I don’t think that bullet technology and function was able to keep up with the increased velocity.
September 11, 2008
Offline
Bert H. said
Can you post pictures of a WRACo 280 Ross cartridge? I have never seen one of them.
Hi Bert,
I’m not Steve, and I don’t have a cartridge, but I do have an empty box. Maybe that’s of interest too?
Best regards from Germany,
Stefan
November 19, 2006
Offline
Bert H. said
Steve,
Can you post pictures of a WRACo 280 Ross cartridge? I have never seen one of them.
While we are on the subject of obsolete cartridges, does anyone here own a rifle chambered for the 7x61mm Sharpe & Hart cartridge? I have 4-boxes of factory new (old) Norma 7×61 S&H empty cases sitting in my reloading supply locker that need a new home (somebody that can use them).
Bert
Here’s a photo of a WRACO .280 cartridge as well as photos next to a .270 WCF:
November 19, 2006
Offline
Here’s a photo of two M-10 bolts – with bolt head extended and one with bolt head retracted:
And here’s a Model 1905 bolt next to an M-10 bolt:
Both are mouse traps. In fact, one snapped shut when I laid it on the table
November 19, 2006
Offline
steff said
Bert H. said
Can you post pictures of a WRACo 280 Ross cartridge? I have never seen one of them.
Hi Bert,
I’m not Steve, and I don’t have a cartridge, but I do have an empty box. Maybe that’s of interest too?
Best regards from Germany,
Stefan
Steff –
Thanks for posting the photo of the box – you had the box and I had the cartridge!
Bill –
I heard Halger was very interested in not paying patent royalties. Changing his cartridge from .288 to .284 literally changed the caliber and that was likely consequential form a patent pespective.
Bo –
I think when we think back to the years surrounding the introduction of the .280 Ross, great leaps were made in velocity. What followed terribly behind was bullet construction. Driving poorly constructed bullets at high velocity – while dangerous big game hunting – did produce some loss of animal life but also some loss of human life. The advancements made in bullet construction is really quite remarkable. Particularly the premium bullets than can now be had.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Thanks to all for posting the pictures… they really clear up many questions. 
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
September 11, 2008
Offline
steve004 said
Steff –
Thanks for posting the photo of the box – you had the box and I had the cartridge!
I’d trade this box for an empty civilian 30-03, .45 ACP, .32 ACP, or .25 ACP box from that era. I’ve been looking for those forever.
Steff
November 19, 2006
Offline
Just found this mix of different vintage .280’s
January 20, 2023
Offline
steve004 said
Here’s a photo of two M-10 bolts – with bolt head extended and one with bolt head retracted:
And here’s a Model 1905 bolt next to an M-10 bolt:
Both are mouse traps. In fact, one snapped shut when I laid it on the table
Steve, I assume the longer bolt on the right illustrates the head extended position.
I’m having trouble visualizing which photo illustrates the locking lugs rotated into locking/firing position.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
November 19, 2006
Offline
Zebulon said
steve004 said
Here’s a photo of two M-10 bolts – with bolt head extended and one with bolt head retracted:
And here’s a Model 1905 bolt next to an M-10 bolt:
Both are mouse traps. In fact, one snapped shut when I laid it on the table
Steve, I assume the longer bolt on the right illustrates the head extended position.
I’m having trouble visualizing which photo illustrates the locking lugs rotated into locking/firing position.
Bill –
It would be the bolt on the left – that is the final position of the bolt head after it has rotated into the receiver ring. It enters horizontally and end up in the vertical position.
To illustrate – here is the bolt making it’s way toward the receiver ring:
Here it is starting to enter:
It has now entered the receiver ring and further push forward on the bolt will start to make it turn:
The bolt head is now turn and if you peer in at an angle, you can watch the lugs rotate into place
The bolt head is now fully turned and seated. It is blocked form view. But prior to this is when you can see it turning.
By the way, as I was handling both the M1905 or M-10 bolts, they both snapped shut on me. Also it took me about four times to get the M-10 bolt back in the receiver as I would lightly touch it to the inside of the receiver and SNAP! (It always makes me jump).
