Ross rifle good?

[The Basket]

As with all military arms, there is always a political aspect and this one is no different. Sir Sam Hughes...Canadian minister of militia and defence during early days of ww1..wanted a Canadian rifle and he supported the Ross well beyond the call of duty. He was mad for it and this clouded his judgement. When the Ross fell so did he.

 

[Elvis]

Good point, but we're still back to your question - why did the British choke of supply of SMLE's to the Canadians?
Could it be there just simply weren't enough guns to go around?

 

[The Basket]

There was a shortage of SMLE early on in the war as older Lees were used and P14s made in USA and even Arisakas were bought from Japan and the British were the biggest customer for the Ross.
Why the British didn't allow SMLE per war I don't know. However the Ross once in production would have been difficult to stop and it's failure on the western front was yet to be seen. So maybe in hindsight it was bad decisions but a bad rifle in peacetime is no big deal and can be swept under the carpet but only becomes clear in wartime.

 

[parsifal]

Ross rifles were retained for some time as snipers rifles thereafter, attesting to their exceptional accuracy. In 1917 they were used in the conversion to the Huot automatic rifle. It was an okay conversion, and cost just $50 to do as compared to the $1000 for the comparable Lewis Gun

 

[Clayton Magnet]

One of the primary reasons the Ross failed, was that the British spec ammunition was far looser in tolerance. When paired with new manufactured Canadian ammunition, it worked fine

EDIT: Obviously there were other factors, the bolt assembly procedure being on of them, but the rifle wasn't as bad as let on. And mud affects all bolt actions, not just the straight pulls