Lever Action or Double Rifle?

[Grumpy]

` British snipers found the rifle accurate out to 600 yards and more, with only one inherent disadvantage: the Ross accepted only perfectly clean ammunition, totally free of mud and grit, or else it invariably jammed.`
Canadian troops threw their Ross rifles away and acquired Lee Enfields from fallen British comrades at the earliest opportunity. An interesting design which had a definite following but as a military weapon it was a POS. As such, it would also be a very poor defence weapon because you could never trust that it would operate when required. The fact that the bolt could be assembled incorrectly was a major design failing.
I`ve read Canadian WWI veterans, all of whom utterly despised the Ross and considered it beneath contempt .... they weren`t too impressed with those they considered most responsible for designing, commissioning and issuing the rifle either - Sir Charles Ross and Sam Hughes. It became a major scandal and Sam Hughes, the Canadian Minister for Militia was eventually forced to resign. It should never have been issued as when the initial 1,000 rifles were issued to the RNWCP they found the rifles had well over 100 innate faults. They reverted to their Winchesters and Lee-Metfords in 1906 and forced the development of the MKII version. It was then re-designed again .... and then totally redesigned in 1910.

[Grumpy]

You should not even consider the .22 Hornet because it is totally inadequate as a defensive calibre. The hottest loads available for it only develop some c.850 ft lbs ME - most loads are sub-800 ft lbs ...... As a defensive weapon the shooter would have to be extremely accurate as the only way likely to bring an attacker down would be using head shots only. In the pressure of any attack that would effectively mean that you might as well throw the rifle away .... or use it as a club.
The .22 Hornet is delightful to shoot and generates no recoil that I`ve ever noticed but it is not even legal for shooting little Muntjac deer in the UK because it is so gutless. It`s a fox shooting calibre only.

[Skyman]

There goes the hornet.....

[Grumpy]

Yeah ...... I heard the buzz as it whizzed by.

[Skyman]

It squawked a bit as well...

[Grumpy]

What ? The hornet ? Nah ..... hornets don`t squawk.
I expect that what you heard was me treading on the parrot when I was looking for the hornet. Of course the reason that the parrot was on the ground was probably because the hornet had stung it ...... I expect that made the parrot squawk as well.

[Skyman]

Yes, the parrot was quite abusive and was quite angry with you.Back to topic, what say you regarding the 30.06? I feel it is the most sensible choice given our situation for SD.

[miroflex]

` British snipers found the rifle accurate out to 600 yards and more, with only one inherent disadvantage: the Ross accepted only perfectly clean ammunition, totally free of mud and grit, or else it invariably jammed.`
Canadian troops threw their Ross rifles away and acquired Lee Enfields from fallen British comrades at the earliest opportunity. An interesting design which had a definite following but as a military weapon it was a POS. As such, it would also be a very poor defence weapon because you could never trust that it would operate when required. The fact that the bolt could be assembled incorrectly was a major design failing.
I`ve read Canadian WWI veterans, all of whom utterly despised the Ross and considered it beneath contempt .... they weren`t too impressed with those they considered most responsible for designing, commissioning and issuing the rifle either - Sir Charles Ross and Sam Hughes. It became a major scandal and Sam Hughes, the Canadian Minister for Militia was eventually forced to resign. It should never have been issued as when the initial 1,000 rifles were issued to the RNWCP they found the rifles had well over 100 innate faults. They reverted to their Winchesters and Lee-Metfords in 1906 and forced the development of the MKII version. It was then re-designed again .... and then totally redesigned in 1910.

I was talking of the Model 1910 or the Mark III.

The .280 Ross cartridge is every bit as powerful and versatile as the 7x57 mm Mauser.

The Model 1910 Ross rifle and the .280 calibre cartridge enjoyed a considerable vogue among pre Great War sportsmen. Despite its manifest shortcomings as a military weapon in the Kaiser's War, it continued to be popular in the sporting world during the 1920s and 1930s.

Writing in the Gun Digest 59th Annual Edition of 2005, Jim Foral in an article titled "Lever vs. Bolt" has this to say, "The Canadian Ross, a wonder of the day, enjoyed a good bit of favorable press at the time. It was an expensive rifle, $ 55 in 1914, and sometimes difficult to obtain. Still, many a lad in knee pants daydreamed of owning one." I may mention that 7 mm and 8 mm Mausers retailed at $ 35 apiece in the United States at that time.

On a more personal note, there has been a .280 Ross Mark III in my family ever since its introduction. Four generations of the family have taken a variety of game with it. It is only the stoppage of the supply of commercially loaded cartridges, coupled with the complete ban on shikar, that led to its relegation to the gun rack.

The much dreaded "flying bolt" is a complex affair. The front part of the bolt, containing the interrupted threads that constitute the locking lugs, has to be pulled forward against spring pressure before inserting the bolt into the receiver. In doing so the front portion may fly back under spring pressure, leaving the bolt unlocked, with disastrous, possibly fatal, consequences the next time the rifle is fired.

Cheerio.

[miroflex]

You should not even consider the .22 Hornet because it is totally inadequate as a defensive calibre. The hottest loads available for it only develop some c.850 ft lbs ME - most loads are sub-800 ft lbs ...... As a defensive weapon the shooter would have to be extremely accurate as the only way likely to bring an attacker down would be using head shots only. In the pressure of any attack that would effectively mean that you might as well throw the rifle away .... or use it as a club.
The .22 Hornet is delightful to shoot and generates no recoil that I`ve ever noticed but it is not even legal for shooting little Muntjac deer in the UK because it is so gutless. It`s a fox shooting calibre only.

The .44-40 Winchester, of Wild West fame, develops a muzzle energy of 629 foot pounds only with modern loads. I would not care to stand up against it or against a .22 Hornet either at any range.

Cheers.

[Grumpy]

The Ross 1910 in cal. .303 was the rifle that the Canadian army took to war in 1914 .... and which performed with such ignomy. The Ross, in in various forms, might have been desired by many up to 1914 - there weren`t many that desired it afterwards however. The Ross rifle`s accuracy was indisputable but it was a hopeless military weapon .... and often unreliable in the field.
The Ross rifles in .280 cal saw some popularity post WWII and into the 1920s but although a true magnum and a very high velocity calibre it suffered from the bullet technology of the time not being as advanced as the cartridge. It was used successfully on deer and antelope but when used against thicker skinned game the bullets often fragmented instead of expanding causing injury to animals but not death. Then there were the incidents involving it`s use against lions where it proved totally inadequate resulting in the deaths of and serious injuries to several hunters. By 1925 it was effectively obsolete and when the Winchester .270 was introduced the same year it was killed-off almost completely.

[Grumpy]

The .44-40 was introduced in 1873 before the introduction in rifles of smokeless powders, smaller calibres and much higher velocities. Although thoroughly lacking in power it does have the benefit of a rather larger bullet than the .22 Hornet - the 205gr/220 gr bullets having considerably more knock down power than the little 40gr/50gr bullets of the .22 Hornet. I do know that if I wanted a defensive weapon that my wife could use I`d treat her with a lot more respect than to give her a feeble .22 Hornet ( or .44-40 ) rifle to defend herself with. That`s .357 mag performance from a rifle .... and, frankly, I`d rather have the handgun which would be a far superior close range weapon.

[Safarigent]

Miroflex, if you already have a .315 on your license, you can reload the .280 ross brass, provided thats on your license also.

[winnie_the_pooh]

Is this thread just an academic exercise on the part of the OP or would it lead to something fruitful???

[Safarigent]

In the indian scenario... Fanciful at best.
The OP wants imported stuff at good rates.
If rates are good, either the rifle is worn out or ammo is very expensive/unavailable.
If ammo is available/cheap, rifle chambered for the particular calibre will be expensive.
But, its good to want to have your cake and eat it too!

[miroflex]

The .44-40 was introduced in 1873 before the introduction in rifles of smokeless powders, smaller calibres and much higher velocities. Although thoroughly lacking in power it does have the benefit of a rather larger bullet than the .22 Hornet - the 205gr/220 gr bullets having considerably more knock down power than the little 40gr/50gr bullets of the .22 Hornet. I do know that if I wanted a defensive weapon that my wife could use I`d treat her with a lot more respect than to give her a feeble .22 Hornet ( or .44-40 ) rifle to defend herself with. That`s .357 mag performance from a rifle .... and, frankly, I`d rather have the handgun which would be a far superior close range weapon.

Miroflex: As far as rifles go, the .22 Hornet would make an excellent home defense weapon; though neither of the Savage models would be my choice. Knowing what models they are would be helpful. The Model 340 bolt I would avoid; the Model 23D has a tendency to develop d excessive headspace, though it can be fixed with a shim between the two parts of the bolt.
The Model 219, a break-open single, would be o.k.

The .22 Hornet is considerably more powerful, roughly twice the velocity and a 10% heavier bullet. Anyone hit would take immediate notice. Yet recoil is negligible, even a slightly built woman unaccustomed to shooting would not mind.
Regards.

I would rather go with the advice given by Two Rivers who is considerably more experienced than I am.

Regards.