Remington R51


PDA






Pages : [1] 2 3

Ric
January 30, 2014, 11:03 PM
I was looking at this gun in Guns and Ammo today and can't help but think,
Fixed barrel
Recoil spring around the barrel
Safety on backstrap

It reminds me of an HK squeeze cocker but with a safety on the blackstrap instead of a cocking lever on the front. (But it is a lot cheaper than a P7)

I don't know enough of the history to know which came first. The R51 or the P7 but they seem similar.

What do you think?

If you enjoyed reading about "Remington R51" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jim Watson
January 30, 2014, 11:12 PM
There is no connection between R51 and P7.

The R51 is new, the P7 came out about 1980, the original PA51 about 1915.

M2 Carbine
January 30, 2014, 11:48 PM
What do you think?
I think I told the gun store manager I want the first one they get.:)

Pilot
January 31, 2014, 12:15 AM
Yes, very different pistols. The P7 squeeze cocker actually cocks the striker. The R51's grip safety is like the 1911's.

Skribs
January 31, 2014, 02:05 AM
I'd be interested to try one. It seems to me an attempt at competing with the Springfield XD-S series (specifically the size and caliber).

Mitlov
January 31, 2014, 02:25 AM
It seems to me an attempt at competing with the Springfield XD-S series (specifically the size and caliber).

Here's my theory as a Remington 1911 R1 owner. After having great success with their 1911 introduction a couple years ago, they wanted a conceal-carry companion for it. Same grip angle, same single-action trigger, so it's easy to transfer from one to the other. But they also wanted to keep the price down, because Remington serves a different price bracket than Colt and Sig do...and miniaturizing the 1911 platform is expensive. So going the Colt Defender route was a no-go. But they also didn't want to go super-modern and polymer because they wanted to appeal on a gut/nostalgia level to the same sorts of people who would buy a 1911.

The Remington R51 checks all those boxes. It's an all-metal gun with a hundred-year backstory (just a veeeeery different hundred-year backstory than the 1911). It's got a single-action trigger. The grip angle looks to be the same. The snag-free design is great for conceal-carry, as is the lack of manual safeties. And the price point is what one would expect from a Remington.

My only concern about it is reliability. The Pedersen action has been around for a hundred years, but nobody has put it in a production gun since like 1918? There may be a reason why. If it proves to be reliable, though, I'll probably buy one.

IdahoSkies
January 31, 2014, 02:49 AM
I thought one of the reasons why was that remington held the patent for this particular application.

Mitlov
January 31, 2014, 03:08 AM
I thought one of the reasons why was that remington held the patent for this particular application.

Patents only last a couple decades (the exact amount has changed over the years, but it's generally been around 20 years). That's why everyone and their cousin can make AR-15s without Armalite being able to sue them; same with 1911s and Colt. The patent protections on the Pedersen mechanism expired before WWII.

hardluk1
January 31, 2014, 06:36 AM
The HK was first shown in '76 The older brother to the R51 design , the model 51 first came about in in 1917. The latest remmy handgun is just modern version of the orginal with no influence from any other make or model. Now it does look like many other pistols brand took some design influences from the model 51 starting with the walther ppk but some 25 years later.

SC Shooter
January 31, 2014, 08:45 AM
The new Remington R51 is patterned after Remington's Model 51 that was manufactured in the early 20th century and stopped production in 1933 I believe. It was designed by John Pederson, who John Moses Browning described as the greatest gun designer of all times. The R51 is basically bringing the technology into the 21st century.

gc70
January 31, 2014, 08:50 AM
My only concern about it is reliability. The Pedersen action has been around for a hundred years, but nobody has put it in a production gun since like 1918? There may be a reason why.

There was not much innovation in semi-auto handguns between WWI and WWII, except to satisfy government requirements (Walther PP/PPK/P38 in Germany, FN GP35 in France, Astra 400 in Spain). The situation was even worse in the US; with the exception of the 1911 supported by government contracts, semi-auto production died out during the Great Depression.

The Pedersen action may prove to be a turkey that should have been left dead and buried. Or it may be successful and prompt other real design innovations in an industry that has been in a fairly narrow rut for decades.

460Kodiak
January 31, 2014, 10:20 AM
I have no use for one as I'm totally happy with my XDs, but would like to handle one none the less. The bore axis does look low, and I am curious how that makes the recoil impolse feel. I'd like to feel up the trigger pull too.

Eb1
January 31, 2014, 10:55 AM
I want one, and will have one.

MagnumDweeb
January 31, 2014, 11:03 AM
I'm going to wait till May or June to get one so that way if there are any bugs or defects they'll hopefully be identified or sorted by then. I definetly want one and am holding off on buying any semis till I get one if it turns out to be a gun largely free of defects and bugs.

Orion8472
January 31, 2014, 11:06 AM
I will be getting one as soon as my local gunstore gets one in.

On a side note, my gunsmith bro had a P7 [double stack] apart on his table last night. . . . and all I can say is . . . . "damn, that's a lot of tiny parts". He's one of those who are well versed in the P7.

Ric
January 31, 2014, 11:53 AM
I would think that with the fixed barrel it would be very accurate with a good load. If the reliability proves out, I will probably get one.

armoredman
January 31, 2014, 11:57 AM
I would love to try one.

wleggart
January 31, 2014, 12:47 PM
I visited with a fellow that was at the shot show and commented that Remington had a waiting line to shoot the R51. It was very long. The gun was handed from one shooter to the next and continued to shoot. Maybe a very carefully fitted gun or maybe a reliable design. I intend to get one to offer easy of concealability where my 1911 is just too big and heavy.

Mitlov
January 31, 2014, 01:42 PM
I visited with a fellow that was at the shot show and commented that Remington had a waiting line to shoot the R51. It was very long. The gun was handed from one shooter to the next and continued to shoot. Maybe a very carefully fitted gun or maybe a reliable design. I intend to get one to offer easy of concealability where my 1911 is just too big and heavy.

That's odd...I had heard that Remington wasn't allowing people to shoot the Remington R51 at Shot Show? I've found range day video of Glock letting everyone and their cousin take a try on the Glock 41 and 42, but haven't seen a single range day video of the R51.

C0untZer0
January 31, 2014, 01:52 PM
The R51 didn't make it in time for Media Day, but I didn't think it was absent for the whole show.

Mitlov
January 31, 2014, 02:06 PM
That makes me feel better. I had gotten the impression that they were not letting anyone shoot the R51 at Shot Show, which considering its February 2014 release date, concerned me. I really want this gun to be good, because on paper, it's exactly what I've been looking for for a daily carry gun.

scramasax
January 31, 2014, 02:25 PM
All I can say is "Back to the future" Now if Colt would just make locked breach 1903 and 1908 pistols with the same feel as the originals I might get excited;)

Cheers,

ts

Jim Watson
January 31, 2014, 03:04 PM
I just wonder where people wanting locked breech Pocket Hammerless Colts think the extra machinery is supposed to go and still keep the look and feel.

Look at the Cylinder & Slide "1908" based on a cut up 1911 to see what it would end up like.

1858
January 31, 2014, 03:14 PM
I visited with a fellow that was at the shot show and commented that Remington had a waiting line to shoot the R51. It was very long. The gun was handed from one shooter to the next and continued to shoot.

The fellow you visited with is full of it. I was at media day and asked the Remington folks about the R51 and why it wasn't available to shoot. They told me that it was being launched the next day so didn't have it at media day. I was very surprised by that response. The R51 was available in the Remington booth to handle during the four day show but that's all.

barnbwt
January 31, 2014, 06:21 PM
"I just wonder where people wanting locked breech Pocket Hammerless Colts think the extra machinery is supposed to go and still keep the look and feel."

Precisely. I think this is actually the root cause of why the original 51 didn't find more acclaim. Even after all the press the R51 has gotten, you still get guys saying "it's like a PPK" even though it is neither DA nor straight blowback. People look at it, and think it'll be a straight blowback Spanish thing, meaning a cheap and uncomfortable gun.

They look at a much beefier SIG setup with a very tall bore axis, and know they're getting more for their buck with that imposing profile rather than a svelt layout with few external controls. Bigger Gun Syndrome, applied to small(er) guns.

If Remington were smart (if);
-They would never use or allow the term "blowback" anywhere near the gun; most people don't care about the details, but know that equates to "cheap" whether the term is accurate or not for the design. "Fixed Barrel Recoil-Op" sounds much more legit, with Pedersen System/Hesitation Lock as a shorthand after initial explanation
-They would have been very forthcoming about the dimensions, weight, and schedule; the shear amount of response to the initial announcement should have convinced their marketing boneheads that initial sales weren't going to be an issue, and that they should instead focus on meeting customer expectations. Delays/vaporware are nothing new and kind of expected of new products at this point, but being unprepared for SHOT so soon after their announcement should really result in a reprimand or two, if not more.
-They would have kissed the rears of internet reviewers harder; this goes in hand with the extreme level of demand --the reviewers feel it too, and seem extremely slighted when they aren't chosen for shooting reviews. As it drags on, they and their readers are growing increasingly skeptical of the rollout schedule since the demo pistols seem to have very limited availability.
-They would have done whatever it took to make a real promotional video; They had a static pistol in a camera-shy guy's hands while he mumbled for a few minutes, followed by at best 5 seconds of shooting footage. No depiction of takedown, no close ups of the gun (only glossy/rendered still shots), just pure, rampant speculation on the part of salivating internet enthusiasts. Maybe it was because it appeared to be freezing in AZ that day (speaker had a puffy jacket and the man-bear his gloved hands in pockets), but that video was ridiculously amateurish for what was essentially a product rollout. Obviously Remington's R&D hadn't even spoken to Marketing at this point.
-They would make every last one of these early guns a "Special Retro Edition" with much nicer finish and initial tuning/testing than they ever do; catering to the monied/impulsive crowd that will buy up every initial offering regardless of price. The presence of these nice guns circulating online and in print will build a good rep for a very unfamiliar operating system, and a company in dire need of a cleaner image. Once the most influential (and loudest) early adopters are taken care of, then start banging out the "volks-pistol" version with the boring finish/sights/grips at a competitive price offered as an initial pre-order during the first luxury run. After that second rounds' kinks are worked out (people will be more accepting/dismissive of them since they are the 'cheap version'), Remington can then ask whatever price it needs for a then-established product to be market-competitive.

And all this from an Engineer who's never taken a single marketing or business-economics class. I really wonder who was asleep at the switch over there, since this seems as lousy a rollout as the Steyr GB (hey, let's get these other idiots to make the first run; if it sucks, we won't get the blame when we go to sell our identical-looking pistol :banghead:). I wonder if the R&D team had their schedule bumped ahead by, oh, I dunno, six months! :mad:

It's as though they are trying to meet the one expectation that customers are rightly incredulous about (that a radically new secret pistol line can be unveiled and distributed within 2 months), at the expense of all the other expectations that had them excited in the first place. "Who cares if they've been waiting 10 years for a 1911-killer; we need it tomorrow even if that means it won't hold a candle to one!"

Could Freedom Group be trying to make a quick cash-grab off the R51 before moving on? :scrutiny:

TCB

Mitlov
January 31, 2014, 07:03 PM
I agree that courting the YouTube reviewers would have been a good move. I mean, with the Glock 42, I got to see R. Lee Ermey explaining to IraqWarVeteran8888 (or whatever his name is) why the gun is so great, and then I got to see him shooting it. And then I got to see Destinee shooting it and fawning over it. Then I got to see the folks from RangeTime shooting it. This stuff matters in 2014.

As for a promotional video, they did do one, and the production values are pretty slick. However, they haven't properly promoted the video, and since its posting on January 13th, it has less than 40,000 views.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgmCxuW3rgY

armoredman
January 31, 2014, 07:29 PM
I'd love to review it, but I'd would be kinda way down the list. ;)

Gun Master
January 31, 2014, 08:38 PM
Does anybody know when it will be available at our local retailers?:confused:


How long do you think it will be before we'll know they have worked out all the "bugs"? What review sources can we trust in the meantime?:scrutiny:

It seems they are playing down that the R51 is a single action, especially since most of the new CCW are double action.:rolleyes:

wally
January 31, 2014, 09:47 PM
I would think that with the fixed barrel it would be very accurate with a good load.

Common misconception, fixed barrel auto pistols are generally very accurate off a mechanical (Ransom) rest, but not so much in real shooting because the sights are on the slide making any slide to frame play critical.

In a Browning type action where the slide and barrel is locked together any slide to frame play is only a second order effect when coupled through the link or cam on lockup.

The R51 "locking block" could help make it a very accurate pistol, or not, the devil is in the details.

Hangingrock
February 1, 2014, 11:11 AM
I thought the write up in Guns&Ammo March 2014 issue was interesting enough that I purchased the magazine while grocery shopping. There was also a article buy Patrick Sweeney on the original model 51 to complement the new R51 article by Chris Mudgett.

I've witnessed enough new firearms entering the market to with hold judgment until the item is widely distributed and past the initial production run.

Gun Master
February 1, 2014, 03:42 PM
I noticed the R51 has only two safeties, a hammer block and a grip safety. Thankfully the R51 does not have a magazine disconnect, as did the Model 51 and several modern ones. Also no thumb (manual) safety to fumble with.:)

Gun Master
February 1, 2014, 08:08 PM
I've already seen the R51 for sale online at less than $400, but shown "Not in Stock" .

righteoushoot
February 1, 2014, 08:14 PM
I've already seen the R51 for sale online at less than $400, but shown "Not in Stock" .

Yep, and I have a .45 ACP Luger for sale. Just don't happen to have it HANDY! :neener: :D

Gun Master
February 1, 2014, 08:48 PM
Yep, and I have a .45 ACP Luger for sale. Just don't happen to have it HANDY! :neener: :D
I understand, and I'm confident you express the majority opinion for your area.

Pilot
February 1, 2014, 08:54 PM
I handled the R51 today at the Outdoor Show in Harrisburg, PA, and was VERY impressed. The Remington rep said it would be available at the end of February.

Gun Master
February 2, 2014, 09:44 PM
Some of you IRS guys, please tell me I can receive a tax exemption on the R51, "to help the economy".

Phantom Captain
February 2, 2014, 10:07 PM
My LGS told me they are due to get 10-15 of them in as soon as they are released. I'm at the top of the "to call" list as soon as they come in and will pick one up ASAP. He also told me that they may be in sooner rather than later. Apparently the Glock 42 wasn't supposed to come out til mid/end February but they started showing up mid January.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed. I really can't wait to get my hands on one and haven't been this excited by a new release in as long as I can remember.

PabloJ
February 2, 2014, 10:28 PM
I give Remington credit for making something different. I'm tired of seeing single stack Glockish stuff like PPS, Shield or XDs. How many ways can one repackage something assigning different name to it.:rolleyes:
I will not be buying one because I already own R9 and this gun doesn't really offer me anything I need.

barnbwt
February 3, 2014, 12:52 AM
"As for a promotional video, they did do one, and the production values are pretty slick. However, they haven't properly promoted the video, and since its posting on January 13th, it has less than 40,000 views."

Too slick, if'n you ask me. I'll say again; their marketing department has no idea what it's doing. That video is designed to market some tacticool military lookalike stuff with rails all over it; not the compact pistol with a (again, only in the demo samples :rolleyes:) polished blue slide and curves that place it in a tuxedo jacket or purse. "Extreme situations," "tactical deployment," the stupid 24 timer counters all over the place :barf:.

Me? I'd have demonstrated the concealability and easy draw (all guns can be drawn from good holsters, but this would show off the curvy edges in a very intuitive way) by placing the gun and its shooter in ordinary-looking situations --the very type that every buyer is thinking about using this gun for. No one is planning to use, or fanaticizing about using, this gun in a tactical mall-ninja hostage scenario. I'd have liked to have seen the gun next to other competing models (which would have also eliminated the early wrong-dimension FUBAR, btw) and at least a brief breakdown of its internals. Heck, a side-by-side with the original M1951 was a "no duh!"

But by all means, splice together five minutes of Weaver rapid fire sequences and Ransom rest targets set to rock music and narrated by a Don Lafontaine wannabe :rolleyes:

TCB

Sistema1927
February 3, 2014, 07:23 PM
Maybe his friend shot it during the range session that Remington arranged prior to this article written Jan 22nd:

http://www.downrange.tv/blog/remingtons-r51-9mm-pistol/27518/3/

He says that they went through 5k rounds that day.

kyarcher
February 4, 2014, 08:15 PM
I plan on buying one as soon as they hit the dealers. My fear is that dealers will jack up the price which I hear is $420 MSRP.

Gun Master
February 4, 2014, 08:24 PM
I plan on buying one as soon as they hit the dealers. My fear is that dealers will jack up the price which I hear is $420 MSRP.
That's the way I figured it, too. While we are waiting for the kinks to be worked out, $ UP $ goes the price!!!:mad:

1SOW
February 5, 2014, 04:44 AM
This pistol is SA ONLY, internal hammer fired , all metal, very high grip with a very low bore axis that leads to less muzzle flip, sub-compact and not at all like the striker fired pistols. It's less than an inch 'thick' and has no waste space internally and actually very few parts at all.

Pedersen designed an amazing pistol that beat the Colt 1911 in every category, but didn't have the Colt name backing it.

mdauben
February 5, 2014, 12:03 PM
Looks like one of the more intersting releases as this years SHOT show. Not sure if I actually need one, but I would not mind a chance to look an R51 over and run a box of ammo though one.

hardluk1
February 5, 2014, 03:01 PM
Looks like there going to enough of us buying them to get a good feel for others. That's is if and when we can get one !!

Mr.357Sig
February 5, 2014, 03:23 PM
The R51 is on my short list.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/06/3ahugyga.jpg
From top: R51, Shield 9, LC9

PabloJ
February 5, 2014, 04:14 PM
Bravo to Remington folks who unlike volk at Glock can think "outside the BOX".:)

Gun Master
February 5, 2014, 04:19 PM
:)Bravo to Remington folks who unlike volk at Glock can think "outside the BOX".:)
I'd like to see us get un-Glocked and get Re-mingtonized.:)

Cooldill
February 5, 2014, 04:22 PM
At first I was mad excited about this gun, now, I'm kind of on the fence.

There was a picture a guy made comparing this gun to other sub-compacts like the Glock 26, XDS, and J-frame Smiths. This pistol looked smaller than most of them and had a low bore axis. I was very intrigued because I'm looking to get a gun for all-the-time pocket carry.

Turns out the guy got the measurements wrong and the R51 was over 1/2" larger in all the dimensions, which actually made it larger than most of the other guns. It looked nearly the length of a Glock 19.

I can understand it's much slimmer than a Glock and supposedly has some good shooting attributes, but I would rather have a Glock 26 for only a little more bulk. Still waiting to see one in person. I told my LGS I want to see the first one they get.

hardluk1
February 6, 2014, 01:14 PM
Even using the wrong measurements it would have been to be to be a practical pocket pistl unless a shield and cw9 are concidered pocket pistols. I don't . Now that we know its a 1/2 or 3/4"" longer , Oh Well. Its still offers a low bore and a full grip in a short height pistol. It should still make a fine thin IWB pistol that should hide under most any shirt.

cooldill, More bulk? It will weight about the same at 20oz.

Billy Shears
February 6, 2014, 01:59 PM
Speaking for myself, I'm glad those earlier estimated measurements were wrong. I don't want a true subcompact. I don't pocket carry, and I'd rather have a slightly larger gun (that still disappears in an IWB holster) for a little extra magazine capacity and better control. This new Remington seems to contain precisely the features I want in a carry gun.

Orion8472
February 6, 2014, 02:20 PM
I never considered the R51 as a pocket pistol, but as an IWB pistol, so even if it isn't necessarily as small as some initially thought it was going to be, it will still be something I will pick up for myself.

gravel
February 7, 2014, 02:33 PM
Why haven't we seen (at least me) any video of take down and reassemble procedures on this piece? Those rings on the barrel make me wonder how much pull is needed for the job.

jigglyjames29
February 7, 2014, 03:02 PM
Ugh, would have bought one if it was 6" OAL.
Too bad it's like G19 sized.

VA27
February 7, 2014, 10:12 PM
It measures the same height and length as my Colt 1903, and that gun fits my Wrangler pockets just fine.

It's no subcompact by today's standards, but it'll do until some specialty gunsmith comes up with a chopped version.

cfullgraf
February 7, 2014, 11:32 PM
I handled the R51 today at the Outdoor Show in Harrisburg, PA, and was VERY impressed. The Remington rep said it would be available at the end of February.

I handled one at the Outdoor Show as well and liked it as well. I am interested.

The Remington reps have their story straight as they also told me shipping at the end of February.

barnbwt
February 8, 2014, 12:35 AM
"It's no subcompact by today's standards, but it'll do until some specialty gunsmith comes up with a chopped version."

It's also not in a subcompact caliber, which seems to get lost in the mix a lot. Imagine the "appeal" of a two/three finger grip subby that can fire 9mm +P loads :eek::evil:. It'd be the 357 K-frame all over again :p

FWIW, there are a few internet goobers claiming to see them already, though I'm sure that bunkus trolling, or goobers who are mistaking a G42 for the R51 :D. I will definitely be asking around the next several weeks as they "deploy" into the surrounding "area of operations" (to borrow some tack-speek from that goofy video :neener:). Aside from what are mostly marketing blunders thus far, it still seems unlikely the gun can be utterly terrible out of the gate. That said, I still wouldn't pre-order for one sight unseen --that's truly asking for trouble. A quick once-over to make sure the gun feeds snap caps and actually has a working striker and safety, and doesn't bind up when cycled will allay any fears of "uncertainty" I might have. If it can do those things, it can at worst be "imperfect" rather than unworkable.

TCB

bainter1212
February 8, 2014, 09:05 AM
I am interested in this gun however, I dont understand how it can be safely carried with a round in the chamber and still be considered single action. If it posesses a true "single action" trigger with only a grip safety, it seems like a signifigant departure from the orthodoxy concerning the carry of single actions.

gc70
February 8, 2014, 09:52 AM
A quick once-over to make sure the gun feeds snap caps and actually has a working striker and safety

How's that striker gonna' work on a hammer-fired gun? :eek:

Patocazador
February 8, 2014, 12:26 PM
I have 3 original Remington 51s. Two are .32 acp and one is an unfired .380 in original box with paperwork.

I got the first one at a pawn shop when in college for $60 back in 1965. The others I picked up about 15 years later.
They are the most natural pointing gun I have ever held and I have had and held very many. If the new ones are within 95% of the external dimensions as the originals, they will sell a bunch, especially since they are supposed to be available in 9mm and .40 S&W.

The only drawback of the guns I have is they are a pain to disassemble and assemble. The oldest one I have is so worn that it occasionally will double fire and is not safe for that reason. Parts seem to be unavailable for the originals.

If I pick one up and it points and feels similar to the original, I will buy it .. you will too. :D

Billy Shears
February 8, 2014, 02:08 PM
I am interested in this gun however, I dont understand how it can be safely carried with a round in the chamber and still be considered single action. If it posesses a true "single action" trigger with only a grip safety, it seems like a signifigant departure from the orthodoxy concerning the carry of single actions.
All a gun needs to be, in order to be a single action, is a hammer that has to be manually cocked, and is released by pressing the trigger. That, by definition, is a single action -- the trigger performs one action: releasing the hammer (or striker, in some), not two: cocking and releasing the hammer/striker. It doesn't need a thumb safety in order to somehow qualify.

The fact that the vast majority of single actions have thumb safeties is merely indicative of the fact that most people perceive a need for them, but a gun is still a single action if it has to be manually cocked before firing. There have been single action semi-autos before that had no manual safeties (e.g. the Polish VIS-35 Radom [that thing that looks like a 1911-style thumb safety is nothing more than a take down latch], and the Russian TT-33). For that matter, on the original Model 51, the thumb safety was advertised by Remington as being there as an extra measure of safety for those who wanted it, but they also said the gun could safely be carried with a round chambered, and the user relying on the grip safety only. I've carried one that way for years.

Most people see a need for a thumb safety on a single action auto because of the short, light trigger pull, and the short amount of take up. DA revolvers and autos are not perceived to need them simply because the longer, heavier pull provides the needed margin of safety to avoid negligent discharges (as long as you remember to exercise proper gun handling habits). Guns like the Glock which are not quite one nor the other, mechanically, still have no manually operated safety because again, the length and the weight of the trigger pull are thought to provide an adequate margin of safety. The old Model 51 had a trigger pull in the 5-7 pound range (which is about what Glocks come with today), and enough take up that a manual safety wasn't considered absolutely necessary. No doubt Remington feels the same way about the R51, and the current demand for modern pistols with no manual safeties no doubt led the company to rely on the grip safety, and a slightly heavier, longer SA trigger than most 1911s have, and leave it at that.

Armybrat
February 8, 2014, 03:57 PM
Pato - I've got an original 51 in .380. It was carried by my wife's grandfather here in Texas during the '20s through the '40s - hence no finish left on the slide. Have the box with all papers (including the penny postcard) & bore brush. However the box has fallen apart and I'd like to find a competent bookbinder or skilled artisan to restore it.

Best ergonomics on any pistol I own, including my Ruger SR45 and Kahr CW45

http://i522.photobucket.com/albums/w349/ScoPro/2-4-11snowguns002.jpg

Patocazador
February 8, 2014, 04:06 PM
My box has deteriorated too. The black covering is peeling off.

How about their "modern" filing system to keep track of your purchase? ;) I laughed when I first saw that guy with the high starched collar in front of a wooden filing cabinet.

B!ngo
February 8, 2014, 07:13 PM
There is a partial but valid comparison between the forthcoming R51 and the P7. They come from different continents, significantly different operation systems and were invented a half century apart from one another.
But a mid-scale, low bore axis, all steel, smooth exterior semi auto does bring some commonality to the picture. Interestingly I just started a search for a low-priced 9mm that I could put in a pack, or the trunk of the car without too much worry.
Unless Remington really messes this up, I'll be very happy to buy one though I'll wait for any bugs to get shaken out.
I am a bit disappointed at the limited round count but that reminds me of the P7 again. The narrow gripped M8 with 8 rounds, and the thicker M13. I'd buy one of each for sure.
B

Doc7
February 8, 2014, 07:26 PM
I just held this today at the Great American outdoor show in PA. Wow I love the size. I cannot wait to shoot it. The slide is very easy to rack they said they designed it that way for user friendliness. My wife could not rack a 1911 or any other pistol today (of course I couldn't teach her) but had no issues with this one. I liked the crimson trace model as well.

dbp
February 10, 2014, 01:12 AM
Has anyone seen the specs on this gun, i.e. length, width, weight, etc. I can't find this info anywhere even on Remington's website. Is this info out there yet?

You know what - never mind. The more I look at it the more I think I'll pass.

KodeFore
February 10, 2014, 01:36 AM
When I first saw this on the cover of G&A I thought it was another polymer wonder gun at first, when I found out it was all metal that made it all the better in my eyes. I do think its a shame that it doesn't come with rosewood or walnut grips. In my you tube wonderings I discovered that Gen Patton sometimes carried. I forget weather it was the .32 or the .380. I am surprised Remington doesn't play up that connection. I prefer to pocket carry for ccw, sometimes it's an LCP other times the G27 gets the nod. To me the R51 looks like a nice compromise giving more bang Than the ruger and less bulk than the chubby baby glock. I look forward to these hitting the shelves.

roc1
February 10, 2014, 10:22 AM
I just saw video posted on Remingtons site. Look again
roc1

Mousegun
February 10, 2014, 04:27 PM
I read that it was tested with 5000 rounds of a variety of ammo. The testers were not even standing on the ground but on spent cases.

There was supposed to be only one failure from the whole bunch.

mooner
February 10, 2014, 06:43 PM
I really didn't think the video was full of "tach speak". They used all the terms and buzzwords you would find in any sort of thorough evaluation. The emphasis seemed to be about ease of use. Go watch the video again, it's all of 2 minutes. Maybe the music turned you off, but I think the video was well done and certainly not over the top.

I know, I know, everybody is an expert. If they only listened to me they sell a million, I tell ya!

BTO!

gc70
February 10, 2014, 07:22 PM
Whatever opinion one may have of the merits of the video(s), Remington has dropped the ball badly on the initial marketing of the R51.

A fact sheet should have been provided to the writers at the Gunsite preview to ensure against the type of inaccurate information that was published about the gun. Given what happened, Remington should have promptly released corrected information.

Today, "official" information about the R51 is either strewn throughout a couple of videos or hidden in Remington's 2014 catalog. The company seems blissfully unaware that even a single webpage providing the R51's specifications would be hugely helpful to many, many potential customers.

jerkface11
February 10, 2014, 07:31 PM
They don't have the best track record for releasing new products. Look how poor of a job they did with .260 and did the .30 RAR ever come out?

Gun Master
February 10, 2014, 08:28 PM
Remington has a history of exceptional products, going back over the last 150 years. Starting with the cap & ball era, to the original Model 51, and more recently, the great Model 780 Pump and the marvelous new 1911 .45 autoloader, the company has done well.

I'm least concerned over promotionals than products. In any event, "It could always be better".

I'm sure Remington will attempt to "fill in the gaps" along the way, as best they can.

I look forward to reviewing the R51 "up close and personal".:)

marklmurray
February 10, 2014, 09:11 PM
Why haven't we seen (at least me) any video of take down and reassemble procedures on this piece? Those rings on the barrel make me wonder how much pull is needed for the job.

I just saw this one posted today: http://youtu.be/cBeSJYBYzVE

Same channel - guys son takes it apart. Fast: http://youtu.be/ooTGk7ZdEhg

HexHead
February 10, 2014, 09:18 PM
I heard the other day they will start shipping March 1.

Mitlov
February 10, 2014, 09:20 PM
marklmurray--on one hand, those videos really put to rest the concerns about it being difficult to disassemble. On the other hand, it really does look like a compact, not a subcompact, the more I see it.

skt239
February 10, 2014, 09:39 PM
The truth about guns did a very interesting review about the R51. For anyone considering it, I'd suggest reading that review. Spoiler alert; it's something of a turd.

Gun Master
February 10, 2014, 09:48 PM
From the March 2014 "Guns & Ammo Magazine", page 53 - some statistics :
Barrel 3.4", Length 6.62", Height 4.6", Width 1.07", Weight oz. 21.9 (empty).:)

Gun Master
February 10, 2014, 10:05 PM
I just saw this one posted today: http://youtu.be/cBeSJYBYzVE

Same channel - guys son takes it apart. Fast: http://youtu.be/ooTGk7ZdEhg
Wow! The 1st video was very good, but the 2nd was exceptional! Fourteen seconds take down , and twenty-six seconds reassembly! That kid on #2 was something else! I want one! I want one!:)

gc70
February 10, 2014, 11:58 PM
The truth about guns did a very interesting review about the R51.

Today's TTAG reviews (first (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-remington-r51/) and followup (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/)) are very interesting and the discussion of the reassembly "trick" is particularly informative. But the recurring complaint that "TTAG wasnít on the guest list to Big Greenís all-expenses-paid junket in the desert to test Stage One guns" does not foster a sense of an unbiased review, nor does the disingenuousness of the declaration that the R51 is "almost exactly the same size" as a Commander-size 1911 ... except for not being as long, or tall, or thick.

Gun Master
February 11, 2014, 12:31 AM
On the other hand, we need to try to be objective. Read the review TTAG.:confused:

For now, I'll choose S&W 38, Cz82, P64, or Kel-Tec P32, depending on the circumstances.:rolleyes: Decisions, decisions, decisions.:)

RUT
February 11, 2014, 09:12 AM
>>The truth about guns did a very interesting review about the R51. For anyone considering it, I'd suggest reading that review. Spoiler alert; it's something of a turd.<<

So, should we then assume they're the final word in gun reviews? I'll be happy when Hickock45 weighs in on the matter, as I'd take his council over that of TTAG.

Sam1911
February 11, 2014, 09:16 AM
Played with one at the big PA Outdoors show last weekend.

That thing has potential! I still couldn't see the mechanism at work, but I trust its pretty sweet. The gun is VERY "useable." Some folks will not see it as a pocket gun but to one of my size it's distinctly a compact. However, I felt like I had a real grip on it and could run it very well.

Trigger is crisp. Trigger is a bit heavy and maybe a little in need of tuning (weight and shorten up the reset). But as long as it runs, that thing's a winner.

snooperman
February 11, 2014, 10:13 AM
Just based on the review from "The truth about guns", and the design of this gun, I would be very reluctant to buy one. There are too many other proven guns in the marketplace in that size for me to consider it.

jimbo555
February 11, 2014, 10:18 AM
The truth about guns loves the diamondback db9, I wouldn't trust them!

snooperman
February 11, 2014, 10:22 AM
I have seen several of Hickok 45 so called"gun reviews" . Like many others, He does a lot of shooting but his reviews are short sighted and lacks in -depth critique for gun buyers. Wait a year or two and you will get the ultimate gun reviews from those who bought them and have shot them extensively.

Orion8472
February 11, 2014, 11:09 AM
Mark, that was EXCELLENT information. Thank you!! Looks like Remington did the takedown very well on this pistol.

Fishbed77
February 11, 2014, 03:28 PM
The truth about guns did a very interesting review about the R51. For anyone considering it, I'd suggest reading that review. Spoiler alert; it's something of a turd.

Spoiler alert: That reviewer still sounds like he has sour grapes over not being invited to Remington's original unveiling and range day.

Also, one reviewer's opinion hardly makes a product a turd.

I'll wait until the R51 is out in the wild and I hear reports from real owners and users before I pass judgement.

That said, I will not be a beta-tester.

Also, several of the reviewer's "cons" were highly subjective. The ergonomics did not suit him. That I understand. But all people are different. I look at that design and don't possibly see how I would get slide bite. The lack of a positive and tactile reset is a bit of a bummer, but many, many people used M&P pistols (and were happy with them) for years before S&W redesigned the trigger to make the reset more positive.

Also, about the complaints about the difficulty of field-stripping, and that improperly re-assembling the pistol will cause failures are easily remedied. Just reassemble the pistol correctly. I can think of plenty of popular firearms that can be tricky to fully field strip and re-assemble, but which are still reliable and well-made firearms (Ruger MK III, 1911s with FLGRs, Mossberg 500). The Pedersen system is different, and it no doubt takes some getting used to.

I'm not being an apologist for this design, though. As I said before, I won't be buying one in the short term. Not until the design proves itself in the eyes of users. After that - maybe. It looks like an intriguing pistol with a neat feature set.


.

MrTuffPaws
February 11, 2014, 03:59 PM
don't forget his biggest gripe of not putting the gun back together right causes malfunctions. <deleted>
How dare Remington expect people to reassemble the gun correctly.

Jim K
February 11, 2014, 04:02 PM
It does not negate the valid points TTAG makes, but it would be nice if the "expert" reviewer understood how the gun works. He then, being an "expert", tells us how the Luger works, proving that he doesn't understand that gun either.

Jim

Dain Bramage
February 11, 2014, 06:59 PM
If you read the comments section on the second TTAG article, you will also see some posters call him on the "Commander" 1911 used for comparison not being a Commander. It's tough to tell from the pictures provided, but it might be a 3.5" model. A "Commander", in the loose sense used now, would have a 4" to 4.25" barrel.

F-111 John
February 11, 2014, 07:21 PM
In my you tube wonderings I discovered that Gen Patton sometimes carried. I forget weather it was the .32 or the .380.
According to this Youtube video from the National Firearms Museum, Patton carried a .380 Remington 51.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgzBk0ohUF8

barnbwt
February 11, 2014, 08:32 PM
I only have a couple reservations about the review(er), which would tend to give me cause to take his observations with a grain of salt

1) The belief a poor trigger reset somehow places it far behind the competition despite it having a superior trigger break

2) The claim that high power loads were "pussycats," despite the gun having claws enough to bruise him, and somehow slide-biting him despite being heavily-tailed (I'd love to see the gun in his hand to understand his hold; I have to believe his issues may have arisen from him placing his palm relative to the higher-set-due-to-low-bore-axis trigger. Check out the comparisons of the other guns' trigger/palm placement relative to the R51's)

3) The claim the gun is hard/confusing to reassemble, despite owning a 1911 without an idiot-scratch (how is that possible? Oh yeah, don't be an idiot. I'm sure he'd claim the 1911's status as "not for beginners" is a mark of excellence, somehow, rather than a design flaw)

4) The mention --yet again-- of not being invited to be Remington's tester, going so far as to hint at impropriety ("all expenses paid" :rolleyes:). IIRC, TTAG also wrote some snarky little article about not being let in on the secret of the R51 ahead of time earlier this year.

5) Scant mention of perfect operation of the pistol. A review breakdown shows very high marks in shootability, reliability, and accuracy, and yet it's a "total fail" :scrutiny:. Zero mention of how much more grip area there is relative to the overall pistol as a result of the bore axis, a feature stunningly apparent in your overlay comparisons.

6) Very recent past statements of similar contradictions (the .2" narrower width and smaller height of the R51 is somehow inconsequential, and a crucial feature of other single stack 9's reviewed). Not to mention a consistently negative opinion of the R51 from it's debut (see #4) when no firsthand info was available up to this point, in the process making rather contradictory claims to support earlier opinion.

The axe is ground. Good job Nick Leghorn, I notice your review ranks highest in Google. Can't help but wonder if you got some brownie points from Glock/etc. for this review, though. Color me suspicious, but he does basically assert the gun is dangerous --just before its rollout, mind you-- despite functioning flawlessly for him. And this immediately after the G42's reception has been, well, "turd-like." Anyone else think Nick bought himself a lot of goodwill from other makers for putting a damper on this whole "The Rock" thing? ;)

No, they wouldn't do that... but what if the pistol never escapes these early claims and ceases production in a year or so, driving Remington (a massive potential player) from the modern carry pistol market? Would it be worth it to them then?

http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/630x421xP1340533-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PEv-jVNkgm.jpg
With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size. Itís slightly shorter thanks to the lack of an external baseplate on the magazine<still has an internal one, though ;)>, and the lack of a beavertail means that itís overall length is less as well<don't forget that Condition One hammer, too ;)>. But again itís the details that matter, and even with Bill Wilsonís personal touches, thereís no doubt that the R51 is a much slimmer and sleeker design.

Exact. Same. Size. Except it's smaller in every dimension, without any corners :rolleyes:. Anyone else notice a good 1/4" more room on the frontstrap and 1/2" on the backstrap?

TCB

Gun Master
February 11, 2014, 10:31 PM
Oh, Nick hurt his little hand! Maybe somebody should tell him to stop doing that if it hurts. He must have just started shooting to make that mistake. If he persists, tell him to not shoot so long ("...at the end of the day..."), or he should wear a glove. Also, in real defensive situations it doesn't last that long, and slight pain goes unnoticed.

skt239
February 11, 2014, 10:50 PM
Ok, well I guess I was a bit harsh..

Imo, it's a turd.

:)

Cooldill
February 11, 2014, 11:02 PM
Even using the wrong measurements it would have been to be to be a practical pocket pistl unless a shield and cw9 are concidered pocket pistols. I don't . Now that we know its a 1/2 or 3/4"" longer , Oh Well. Its still offers a low bore and a full grip in a short height pistol. It should still make a fine thin IWB pistol that should hide under most any shirt.

cooldill, More bulk? It will weight about the same at 20oz.
I mentioned bulk as a reference to size, or area, not weight. And for "about the same" weight I can get an extra 3 rounds in the magazine in a PROVEN platform.

gc70
February 12, 2014, 12:08 AM
TTAG has changed its tune in the size comparision article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/).

On February 10, the article originally said: "With the Commander-size 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size."

On February 11, the article was changed to: "With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size."

Even changing the comparison to a smaller gun, the rest of the paragraph still goes on to say that the R51 is really not as tall, or as long, or as thick as the gun it is being compared to.

Here are the actual specs of the "almost exactly the same size" guns being compared:
Bill Wilson Carry Pistol (http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-bill-wilson-carry.asp#.Uvr2moWGfsw):
length 7.6" - height 4.9"
Remington R51 (http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/6b8b992c#/6b8b992c/132):
length 6.625" - height 4.625"

2wheels
February 12, 2014, 12:17 AM
TTAG has changed its tune in the size comparision article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/).

On February 10, the article originally said: "With the Commander-size 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size."

On February 11, the article was changed to: "With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size."

Even changing the comparison to a smaller gun, the rest of the paragraph still goes on to say that the R51 is really not as tall, or as long, or as thick as the gun it is being compared to.
I'm not super familiar with Wilsons... But I believe the 1911 used in the TTAG article is essentially a CCO, with a 4 inch barrel on an Officers frame.

So for him to compare the R51 to a "Commander" or an "Officer" sized 1911 doesn't really work since the 1911 he's using is a blend of both, and doesn't even have a "true" Commander length barrel.

I wonder if Nick knows that...

Mitlov
February 12, 2014, 12:29 AM
Personally, I'm not interested in the R51 anymore...but the TTAG article read like a hatchet-job by a guy with a bias/grudge, not as a neutral review. I was not impressed or persuaded by anything he wrote because prejudgment just oozed from every word.

verdun59
February 12, 2014, 12:44 AM
It's early but I'm calling BS.

hardluk1
February 12, 2014, 02:44 PM
Go over to TTAG and go to there ratings of firearms. Drop down to the lowerest scoreing firearms and see what guns are there that you may own and have desided it totally reliable and worthy of owning.

Then decide if TTAG is even worth worry'n about as a source of reviews.

Orion8472
February 12, 2014, 03:25 PM
I just looked at the list. Oddly, they have a SP101 in both the 2 star rating and the 4 1/2 star rating.

They DID give 5 stars to the CZ P-09, . . . so I can't really fault them too much, . . . . but then, . . . of COURSE it is a 5 star gun.

Mitlov
February 12, 2014, 05:23 PM
I just looked at the list. Oddly, they have a SP101 in both the 2 star rating and the 4 1/2 star rating.

They DID give 5 stars to the CZ P-09, . . . so I can't really fault them too much, . . . . but then, . . . of COURSE it is a 5 star gun.

The two-star rating was for the 22LR model, which is neither a good range gun nor a good self-defense gun. The higher rating was for the .38 +P model if I recall correctly.

9 fingers
February 12, 2014, 06:14 PM
My gunsmith buddy got to fondle one at the Harrisburg Pa outdoor show last week and he called to tell me he was not impressed. But he is not easily impressed. He mentioned that the gun is so narrow at the grips that it is uncomfortable and he did not think much of the build quality. He also told me today that the MSRP is up to $450. I will wait to shoot one before I place my order.
9 fingers

chris in va
February 12, 2014, 07:15 PM
On a side note, I just discovered the FN 5.7 has the same coil over barrel design of the R51 after watching Hikok45's video. Might be partly why the gun has so little recoil.

Gun Master
February 12, 2014, 07:38 PM
No gun is perfect, but one of the best recommendations so far is......Sam likes it !:)

Gun Master
February 12, 2014, 07:47 PM
Ok, well I guess I was a bit harsh..

Imo, it's a turd.

:)
Just for the record, were you referring to the gun or the review?:scrutiny:

Sam1911
February 12, 2014, 07:58 PM
Well, I haven't SHOT it... But I'm intrigued. And I very much DO want one of the big old names in HUNTING guns to go all in to the concealed-carry/defensive market. That's just a huge win. If the gun has potential, I'm going to give it every chance.



Then again, I wasn't invited to their media day, so screw em!



:neener:

Gun Master
February 12, 2014, 08:32 PM
Well, they didn't invite me either, but nor did the rest of 'em.

Please excuse these brief posts. I'm having a colonoscopy tomorrow AM, so....it's a quick dash from the PC to the old John, if you know what I mean.....?:uhoh:

barnbwt
February 12, 2014, 09:27 PM
"If the gun has potential, I'm going to give it every chance."
This. Most of the "fan boys" seem to be speaking from curious optimism, while it seems the majority of detractors come off as coiled rattlesnakes ("I knew it wouldn't be any good" manages to slip out frequently at the end of even a fairly even-handed examination of its faults/features)

Personally, I wanna see what custom shops can wring out of this design. Imagine those swoops polished and blued/hard chromed, the trigger shortened, lightened, and smoothed to the extent of any other SA hammer system, fancy grips of discerning material, tightened up slide rails & polished, and a barrel seat screwed onto the barrel for the slide to self-align against for increased accuracy (turn those grooves into square threads and bore the front of the slide for a conical seat to mate into). Anyone else notice how much simpler the barrel is from Browning-derived designs, and how much smaller the blank to make it needs to be?

Imagine if the 1911 had had no further development since the 92 replaced it, since "that design's a hundred years old and no one uses it (they used the Hi Power for inspiration in nearly all subsequent designs)." Imagine if nothing but the original-spec rattle-ey 1911s were all we had to go by, to say nothing of the dubious QC of the makers of the day leading up to the 91. Shooters and smiths have done a butt-ton of R&D themselves to make the platform into something good, mostly tempted by the uniquely-tunable trigger design. If the R51 trigger is similarly tweakable, I see absolutely no reason why it won't take off in duty/competition circles when smaller guns are desired.

TCB

Carl N. Brown
February 12, 2014, 10:01 PM
The Remington R51 is a modernized version of the original Remngton Model 51. It does retain the Pedersen hesitation locked action. I recall reading in the 1960s that the original Model 51 was considered over engineered for the .380 cartridge, and I notice the R51 is in 9x19 Parabellum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_R51
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_51

barnbwt
February 12, 2014, 10:24 PM
There still seems to be some confusion on how this and other pistol actions operate; I'll try to give a very coarse overview of the various layouts currently offered and the ones the R51 seems to be compared to

Tilting Barrel:
-1911; a pivoting link pushes the barrel up into the slide, causing grooved locking surfaces in the barrel and slide to mesh and lock together. Chamber pressure (resulting in bullet movement/recoil) drives the two meshed parts backward against the moving bullet until pressure drops, at which point the pivoting link drags the barrel down from the slide. The slide continues back on its own momentum (the barrel door-stops against the lower frame and comes to a rest) and the extractor mounted on the integral breechface drags the case from the chamber. The initial slide of the barrel backward rather than the pivot is why the return spring can't go around the barrel; it wouldn't be able to push the barrel forward relative to the frame (only the slide)
-Hi Power; same general concept, only a milled ramp integral on the underside of the barrel contacting a cross pin drags the barrel down from the slide

Rotating Barrel:
-As with the 1911, the locked slide/barrel are pushed backward against the bullet as a locked unit until it exits and pressures drop, at which point the a cam on the frame spins the barrel relative to the slide, and allows the two to disengage. Again, an integral breech block on the slide with an extractor drags the case out on its own retained momentum. This is essentially a rotational analog of the linear Browning tilt-barrel systems.

C96 Mauser:
-I personally think the C96 is closest in layout to the Pedersen action, though they do differ in function. Like the Pedersen, it has a breechblock separate from the slide. However, this antiquated and complex design also has a moving barrel and separate locking piece (more moving parts to obtain a similar result). In the Mauser, the barrel is the slide, and the separate breechblock is pressed up inside its rear portion and locked to it (much like a 1911 barrel to the slide) by a pivoting locking piece driven upward by a cam on the lower frame. To unlock, the locking piece must travel backward off the frame cam (along with the barrel and breechblock), and to do that, the slide/barrel can shift back a short ways. Once the breechblock and barrel decouple, the barrel stops and the breechblock continues on its own momentum to eject/feed.

Blowback:
-True Blowback; All pistols are technically blowbacks if they lack a gas piston. As with locked breeches, gas pressure on the bolt face ultimately is what operates the gun (we call them "recoil operated" because the pressure also drives the bullet forward, generating equal and opposite momentum on each --the "recoil" is the name given to the gun-side of that equation). Simple blowbacks rely on nothing but bolt mass (and to a lesser extent spring pre-load) to slow down the opening of the breech under pressure. Obviously, when higher pressures or slower moving bullets try to open the breech under pressure faster or a greater distance over a longer time, respectively, the bolt/slide mass must go up. The higher the momentum of the bullet, the higher too for the bolt, and battering of the slide stops quickly takes over unless heavy springs are used to cushion the frame (the real reason for heavy springs on blowbacks). For something as small as a pistol, the bolt rapidly gets too large to be practical much beyond cartridges of 9mm power levels. Locked breeches bring the number back down by essentially hiding the true momentum of the bullet from the gun by locking the breech and slide together while under pressure.
-Delayed Blowback; most systems use mechanical advantage (leverage) to effectively multiply the mass of the reciprocating system by forcing a secondary mass to travel faster than the portion actually resisting the breach. There aren't very many examples of this type in pistols because it is still too difficult to get enough delay for powerful cartridges and still retain reliable function, but it is seen commonly in rifles like the H&K G3 platform. The other method of delay that's been successfully implemented in several pistols is gas delay, in which some chamber pressure is tapped and used to oppose the rearward travel of the slide/bolt face. The H&K P7 and Steyr GB function very well, but these systems require very fine tuning of the design and a narrower band of ammo power levels for reliable/safe function than locked breeches enjoy. They are also susceptible to gas port fouling like any truly gas operated system.

FNH Five-seveN:
A weird hybrid of recoil operation and delayed blowback. The barrel and slide are linked, but are not locked. Initially, a lever connects the two, but at different distances from the pivot so that movement of the slide also results in a slightly lesser movement of the barrel in the same direction. This has the effect of slowing the rate at which a breech of given mass opens (delayed blowback) and also increases the overall reciprocating mass opposing the bullet's momentum (a benefit of a locked barrel/breech recoil system). The design is carefully calibrated so that the barrel and slide decouple while the case is still pressurized at a lower level, and the gun operates as a simple blowback thereafter.

Model 51/R51 (Pedersen):
Barrel is fixed. The slide mostly serves to add reciprocating mass to slow unlocking of the separate breechblock and guide its travel during feeding/ejection. When in battery, the slide holds the fully-forward breechblock downward, where it locks into the lower frame to oppose pressure in the fixed barrel. However, there is a small bit of slop between the contact surfaces of the breechblock and frame, which allows the breechblock/slide to shift backward briefly (like a simple blowback), just enough to impart momentum to the slide. At the instant the breechblock contacts the frame, the system is a true locked breech for the remainder of the pressure cycle. It is not a delayed blowback; the breech is fixed during this portion of the cycle. The slide's momentum carries it back long enough for pressures to drop, at which time the breechblock is cammed upward from the frame and slides back with the slide to eject/feed. If you think of the slide as a bolt carrier and the breechblock as a tilting bolt, the system is more like an SKS or Ithaca M37 shotgun, only actuated by that initial stutter of blowback energy rather than a separate gas piston or manual pump action. Because the barrel is fixed, it can be used as the guide rod to keep the slide tensioned relative to the frame.

Hopefully this clears the water for some folks on exactly what is going on in these guns, and why describing the R51 as Blowback or Delayed Blowback is quite misleading. A fixed barrel does not equate to blowback, cheapness, harsh recoil, or any other inherent design flaw. It is, however, one less moving part to go wrong (though the separate breechblock is another --you can't win since the two have to separate somehow :D).

TCB

mgmorden
February 12, 2014, 10:44 PM
The Truth About Guns review didn't really sway my interest.

The guy mainly complained about slide-bite, and admitted that he had very large hands. That's always a potential when you mix large hands with small guns - I also have small hands so I don't usually suffer any issues with those sorts of things.

The other complaint was a lack of tactile reset. I've personally never bought into the hype of the reset feel being so important.

Given that even they admitted that the gun was completely reliable in their testing, I definitely plan on getting one.

jerkface11
February 12, 2014, 11:08 PM
The other complaint was a lack of tactile reset. I've personally never bought into the hype of the reset feel being so important.


Heck if it did have tactile reset he probably would have complained about trigger slap.

Mitlov
February 12, 2014, 11:25 PM
The Truth About Guns review didn't really sway my interest.

The guy mainly complained about slide-bite, and admitted that he had very large hands. That's always a potential when you mix large hands with small guns - I also have small hands so I don't usually suffer any issues with those sorts of things.

The other complaint was a lack of tactile reset. I've personally never bought into the hype of the reset feel being so important.

Given that even they admitted that the gun was completely reliable in their testing, I definitely plan on getting one.


Don't forget they mentioned that if you don't reassemble it as instructed in the manual, it might not work reliably after reassembly! That was one of the more "facepalm" moments of the review. For what gun is that NOT the case?

Nom de Forum
February 12, 2014, 11:37 PM
There still seems to be some confusion on how this and other pistol actions operate; I'll try to give a very coarse overview of the various layouts currently offered and the ones the R51 seems to be compared to

Tilting Barrel:
-1911; a pivoting link pushes the barrel up into the slide, causing grooved locking surfaces in the barrel and slide to mesh and lock together. Chamber pressure (resulting in bullet movement/recoil) drives the two meshed parts backward against the moving bullet until pressure drops, at which point the pivoting link drags the barrel down from the slide. The slide continues back on its own momentum (the barrel door-stops against the lower frame and comes to a rest) and the extractor mounted on the integral breechface drags the case from the chamber. The initial slide of the barrel backward rather than the pivot is why the return spring can't go around the barrel; it wouldn't be able to push the barrel forward relative to the frame (only the slide)
-Hi Power; same general concept, only a milled ramp integral on the underside of the barrel contacting a cross pin drags the barrel down from the slide

Rotating Barrel:
-As with the 1911, the locked slide/barrel are pushed backward against the bullet as a locked unit until it exits and pressures drop, at which point the a cam on the frame spins the barrel relative to the slide, and allows the two to disengage. Again, an integral breech block on the slide with an extractor drags the case out on its own retained momentum. This is essentially a rotational analog of the linear Browning tilt-barrel systems.

C96 Mauser:
-I personally think the C96 is closest in layout to the Pedersen action, though they do differ in function. Like the Pedersen, it has a breechblock separate from the slide. However, this antiquated and complex design also has a moving barrel and separate locking piece (more moving parts to obtain a similar result). In the Mauser, the barrel is the slide, and the separate breechblock is pressed up inside its rear portion and locked to it (much like a 1911 barrel to the slide) by a pivoting locking piece driven upward by a cam on the lower frame. To unlock, the locking piece must travel backward off the frame cam (along with the barrel and breechblock), and to do that, the slide/barrel can shift back a short ways. Once the breechblock and barrel decouple, the barrel stops and the breechblock continues on its own momentum to eject/feed.

Blowback:
-True Blowback; All pistols are technically blowbacks if they lack a gas piston. As with locked breeches, gas pressure on the bolt face ultimately is what operates the gun (we call them "recoil operated" because the pressure also drives the bullet forward, generating equal and opposite momentum on each --the "recoil" is the name given to the gun-side of that equation). Simple blowbacks rely on nothing but bolt mass (and to a lesser extent spring pre-load) to slow down the opening of the breech under pressure. Obviously, when higher pressures or slower moving bullets try to open the breech under pressure faster or a greater distance over a longer time, respectively, the bolt/slide mass must go up. The higher the momentum of the bullet, the higher too for the bolt, and battering of the slide stops quickly takes over unless heavy springs are used to cushion the frame (the real reason for heavy springs on blowbacks). For something as small as a pistol, the bolt rapidly gets too large to be practical much beyond cartridges of 9mm power levels. Locked breeches bring the number back down by essentially hiding the true momentum of the bullet from the gun by locking the breech and slide together while under pressure.
-Delayed Blowback; most systems use mechanical advantage (leverage) to effectively multiply the mass of the reciprocating system by forcing a secondary mass to travel faster than the portion actually resisting the breach. There aren't very many examples of this type in pistols because it is still too difficult to get enough delay for powerful cartridges and still retain reliable function, but it is seen commonly in rifles like the H&K G3 platform. The other method of delay that's been successfully implemented in several pistols is gas delay, in which some chamber pressure is tapped and used to oppose the rearward travel of the slide/bolt face. The H&K P7 and Steyr GB function very well, but these systems require very fine tuning of the design and a narrower band of ammo power levels for reliable/safe function than locked breeches enjoy. They are also susceptible to gas port fouling like any truly gas operated system.

FNH Five-seveN:
A weird hybrid of recoil operation and delayed blowback. The barrel and slide are linked, but are not locked. Initially, a lever connects the two, but at different distances from the pivot so that movement of the slide also results in a slightly lesser movement of the barrel in the same direction. This has the effect of slowing the rate at which a breech of given mass opens (delayed blowback) and also increases the overall reciprocating mass opposing the bullet's momentum (a benefit of a locked barrel/breech recoil system). The design is carefully calibrated so that the barrel and slide decouple while the case is still pressurized at a lower level, and the gun operates as a simple blowback thereafter.

Model 51/R51 (Pedersen):
Barrel is fixed. The slide mostly serves to add reciprocating mass to slow unlocking of the separate breechblock and guide its travel during feeding/ejection. When in battery, the slide holds the fully-forward breechblock downward, where it locks into the lower frame to oppose pressure in the fixed barrel. However, there is a small bit of slop between the contact surfaces of the breechblock and frame, which allows the breechblock/slide to shift backward briefly (like a simple blowback), just enough to impart momentum to the slide. At the instant the breechblock contacts the frame, the system is a true locked breech for the remainder of the pressure cycle. It is not a delayed blowback; the breech is fixed during this portion of the cycle. The slide's momentum carries it back long enough for pressures to drop, at which time the breechblock is cammed upward from the frame and slides back with the slide to eject/feed. If you think of the slide as a bolt carrier and the breechblock as a tilting bolt, the system is more like an SKS or Ithaca M37 shotgun, only actuated by that initial stutter of blowback energy rather than a separate gas piston or manual pump action. Because the barrel is fixed, it can be used as the guide rod to keep the slide tensioned relative to the frame.

Hopefully this clears the water for some folks on exactly what is going on in these guns, and why describing the R51 as Blowback or Delayed Blowback is quite misleading. A fixed barrel does not equate to blowback, cheapness, harsh recoil, or any other inherent design flaw. It is, however, one less moving part to go wrong (though the separate breechblock is another --you can't win since the two have to separate somehow :D).

TCB

Very nicely done. Thank you for taking the time to hit the reset button on what we are really discussing.

Billy Shears
February 13, 2014, 12:56 AM
Most of the "fan boys" seem to be speaking from curious optimism, while it seems the majority of detractors come off as coiled rattlesnakes ("I knew it wouldn't be any good" manages to slip out frequently at the end of even a fairly even-handed examination of its faults/features)
I've noticed this as well. I know people can be opinionated, but it never ceases to amaze me how many people there are, whenever any knew design comes out, who will jump in, long before an example of the gun makes its way into their hands, and categorically declare that its going to be a piece of junk and anyone interesed in buying a gun that size should just "get a (insert commenter's favorite pistol here)." One comment that is absolutely guaranteed to come up when any really new design comes along is "solution in search of a problem."

I've never understood any of this. Why do so many people seem to actively want any new design to fail?

Gun Master
February 13, 2014, 09:19 AM
I've noticed this as well. I know people can be opinionated, but it never ceases to amaze me how many people there are, whenever any knew design comes out, who will jump in, long before an example of the gun makes its way into their hands, and categorically declare that its going to be a piece of junk and anyone interesed in buying a gun that size should just "get a (insert commenter's favorite pistol here)." One comment that is absolutely guaranteed to come up when any really new design comes along is "solution in search of a problem."

I've never understood any of this. Why do so many people seem to actively want any new design to fail?
Personality, job security, bad marriage, constipation........whatever, who knows, but it does happen. We just need to not accept all of what they say, because they're "experts".:scrutiny:

barnbwt
February 13, 2014, 10:02 AM
They see a legitimate competitor as a threat to their gun's hegemony --and that scares them since they think only 'the best' can defend them against the unknown ;)

TCB

Nom de Forum
February 13, 2014, 11:01 AM
They see a legitimate competitor as a threat to their gun's hegemony --and that scares them since they think only 'the best' can defend them against the unknown ;)

TCB

For many people their pistols have, at least at a subconscious level, the magical protective qualities that people in primitive cultures assign to the totems regularly carried on their persons to protect them from supernatural and real threats. Admitting that anything else could provide just as potent defense creates doubt in their magical thinking.

meanmrmustard
February 13, 2014, 11:08 AM
I'd buy it.

Vodoun da Vinci
February 13, 2014, 11:17 AM
For many people their pistols have, at least at a subconscious level, the magical protective qualities that people in primitive cultures assign to the totems regularly carried on their persons to protect them from supernatural and real threats. Admitting that anything else could provide just as potent defense creates doubt in their magical thinking.

This! ^^^^^^^^ :)

Folks have done the very same with the Glock 42, the upcoming Beretta Pico and other pistols...they hate it and fear it/are intimidated that other folks might find it useful or excellent and so manage their irrational fears (that what they really like and trust might not be "all that and a bag of chips for everyone/everywhere/all the time!!" ) by trashing it before anyone has had the opportunity to fully test it and see how it performs in the hands of many people of diversified interests and aptitudes.

You know....Haters gotta Hate. Right? :D

That said, I'm not in the market for it but hope it does well and folks like it and use it/buy it. It's another potential SD platform and we need as many as the market can tolerate.

That THAT said, I personally have found TTAG reviews to be pretty accurate overall for an "Internet Based Gun Review" which is bought and paid for one way or the other. Eventually it just is another opinion and to really know we have to shoot them and evaluate it our own selves. I do my own reviews - my Wife does hers. We are vastly different folks and the proff of a great gun is in the shooting in my hands. I'm personally looking forward to shooting an R51 but will probably not run out and buy one to do that. Someone in my immediate vicinity or at the Range will do so and I'll shoot his.

VooDoo

Billy Shears
February 13, 2014, 02:17 PM
That THAT said, I personally have found TTAG reviews to be pretty accurate overall for an "Internet Based Gun Review" which is bought and paid for one way or the other.
Maybe, but I'm finding it really hard to believe the recoil was as punishing as he says it is. He attributes it directly to the narrow width of the gun focusing all the recoil right into a small area of your hand. First off, I've heard no other reports of this painful recoil from the few others who've had a chance to shoot it so far, and secondly, I have a gun (Walther PPS), which is just as narrow in the grip area, and is even lighter in weight, and I don't find it even remotely unpleasant to shoot, with either standard pressure ammo or +P. I've fired guns which are unpleasant to shoot (scandium J frames with .38 +Ps, and 4in .44 magnums with hot loads), and the Walther, while it's not a soft shooter, is not one of them. Given this guns similar size and weight, I'd be surprised if its any worse.

Also, comments like this one bother me:

Not all of these improvements are actual improvements, though ó the recessing of the magazine baseplate is a carry mod too far. The magazineís baseplate sits flush with the surrounding metal, making it nice and smooth. But when you try and insert the magazine into the gun with the palm of your hand Ė like a normal reload Ė you have to physically press the magazine into the gun until the magazine catch clicks. Otherwise the gun wonít run.

Really? You have to insert the magazine in all the way or the gun won't function. :scrutiny: Who'da thunk it? Thanks for the warning Captain Obvious. His gripe seems to be that the magazine baseplate fits flush with the grip. So what? A lot of guns, and virtually all older ones have that feature. If this really bothers you, I'm sure you can get a rubber base pad and put it on. Complaints like this make it look like he was bending over backwards to find things to ding the gun on, while at the same time minimizing the gun's good point (e.g. a single short sentence about the gun's functioning with all ammo, without a single malfunction). And inconsistent statements like "...theRemington R51 is painful to shoot, even with light loads" and "The R51′s low bore axis and lighter slide did indeed reduce felt recoil..." Well which is it?

The review comes across like Leghorn wanted to ding the gun. Whether this was because TTAG was honked off at not having been invited to shoot it originally, or because they think that picking a few guns to review negatively will get them a reputation for "telling it like it is" or something else I don't know. But I'll judge this thing for myself when it comes out.

hardluk1
February 13, 2014, 02:20 PM
TTAG is no better at a review than the run of the mill gun buyer. You have a lady there that shoots the heck out of a small heavier recoil light pm9 and then a guy that does not like smaller heavier recoiling guns that does not like a R51. As if a 6.3" 21oz pistol is light. What if he had tested the pm9 or 40. Maybe TTAG should do reviews only as a mix of peoples reviews instead of one guy they my be the worse they have for that handgun.

I am not sure if I have shot a firearm that I did not like atleast for what it was. I will always try to swap firearms if I can at gun ranges and have got'n to shoot lots of firearms I otherwise would never have got'n the chance to try .

Fishbed77
February 13, 2014, 02:21 PM
Ok, well I guess I was a bit harsh..

Imo, it's a turd.

:)

That's cool. I'd like to hear more. Can you tell us about your experience handling and shooting the R51?

Vodoun da Vinci
February 13, 2014, 03:00 PM
Maybe, but I'm finding it really hard to believe the recoil was as punishing as he says it is.

The review comes across like Leghorn wanted to ding the gun. Whether this was because TTAG was honked off at not having been invited to shoot it originally, or because they think that picking a few guns to review negatively will get them a reputation for "telling it like it is" or something else I don't know. But I'll judge this thing for myself when it comes out.

There you go....anyone's evaluation is just opinion until you shoot it yerself. I was simply saying that as far as the TTAG reviews I have read about guns I have actually shot and owned (a few of them actually) I agreed with them in principle. I do think the review sounds as if he is unfairly dinging the gun as well. But overall I don't think the TTAG reviews are usually completely off base, biased, and worthless. This could be the first one...

Then again I shot the Ruger LCP and found it extremely snappy. My Wife found it too snappy and several members of our support group found it unacceptable/unmanageable as well. They are a very popular and well made piece and have sold a lot of guns and been reviewed as being decent. I have drawn some pretty pointed and nasty criticism for stating my findings...controllability and all that as well as perceived recoil is a highly variable thing. This is why we need a lot of guns and new ideas to be continually developed and put to market.

One size does not and will not likely ever fit all.

VooDoo

Jim K
February 13, 2014, 08:32 PM
Deleted.

Gun Master
February 13, 2014, 08:50 PM
Deleted.
What up, Jim K ?:)

gym
February 13, 2014, 10:24 PM
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-remington-r51/
This review points out several potential problems especially with re-assembly. It is possible to assemble the gun so that it appears to be correctly assembled but will stop firing after an unknown amount of rounds, "watch the video.

DrDeFab
February 13, 2014, 10:41 PM
I found this helpful:

http://www.guns.com/2014/02/13/shooting-field-stripping-remington-r51-video/

I'm interested in the design, mostly like the looks - except the muzzle is a bit chunky for my taste - and I'm fine with it being more of a compact than a sub-compact.

I will, however, probably wait a few months after it hits my LGS to let the dust settle.

Billy Shears
February 14, 2014, 03:46 AM
I found this helpful:

http://www.guns.com/2014/02/13/shoot...ton-r51-video/
Thanks for that link. It's interesting that he refers, in his video, to the truthaboutguns.com review that gym posted a link to in the post about yours, and which we have been discussing for the last several posts. I find it particularly interesting that he refers specifically to the TTAG reviewer's comment that he'd rather detail strip a 1911 than field strip this thing (that comment was made by Leghorn in his "ease of maintenance" category at the end, in which he gave the gun one star out of five). I thought Mr. Slowik's comment was very apt (especially after seeing him strip and reassemble the gun), that Leghorn "either did not have an owner's manual or was unable to read it, because it's actually a pretty simple process." He also seemed to indicate that Leghorn's assertion that you will not know if you reassembled the gun properly is false because the slide will lock back if you push the slide stop pin in so that the slide lock goes under the spring, and if you get the slide lock in above the spring, then the slide will lock to the rear with no magazine in the gun. Leghorn himself even admitted this was how the Remington reps discovered one of the guns had been reassembled incorrectly at the shot show booth, so I have to call BS on Leghorn's assertion that it's way too easy to assemble the gun incorrectly, and there's no way to tell that you did. It probably is easy enough to assemble it wrong -- if you don't read the instructions -- but it seems that despite Leghorn's assertion, there is a function check that will tell you whether or not you've done it correctly. It seems like Mr. Leghorn simply can't follow the instructions in the owner's manual.

As an interesting aside, owners of this pistol will have to be careful: it looks like it should be possible to give the frame of this gun exactly the same sort of idiot scratch you can put on a 1911.

gc70
February 14, 2014, 08:10 AM
He also seemed to indicate that Leghorn's assertion that you will not know if you reassembled the gun properly is false because the slide will lock back if you push the slide stop pin in so that the slide lock goes under the spring, and if you get the slide lock in above the spring, then the slide will lock to the rear with no magazine in the gun. Leghorn himself even admitted this was how the Remington reps discovered one of the guns had been reassembled incorrectly at the shot show booth, so I have to call BS on Leghorn's assertion that it's way too easy to assemble the gun incorrectly, and there's no way to tell that you did.

The R51 is certainly not the first pistol that can be improperly assembled with the lug on the slide release above the slide release return spring. However, we will have to see where the slide release return spring is located in the frame cutout for the slide release lever's lug to be able to tell how prone the R51's design might be to improper assembly.

Here is a discussion of the same type of problem (http://sigtalk.com/sig-sauer-pistols/18042-slide-catch-spring-problem-2022-a.html) involving a Sig SP2022 and a close-up photo of the SP2022's slide release return spring (http://i1312.photobucket.com/albums/t524/saudadeii/2022/IMG_0003_zps4035628d.jpg). Since the SP2022 was introduced in 2002 (and it predecessors the SP2009/SP2340 were introduced in 1998), there has been plenty of opportunity for owners -including a quarter of a million French police- to screw up the slide release reassembly. I don't remember any discussion of the SP2022's design being "fundamentally flawed" as a consequence. And Nick Leghorn must not have thought the design presented a problem because he did not mention it in TTAG's review of the SP2022 (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/10/foghorn/gun-review-sig-sauer-sp2022/).

barnbwt
February 14, 2014, 09:49 AM
"As an interesting aside, owners of this pistol will have to be careful: it looks like it should be possible to give the frame of this gun exactly the same sort of idiot scratch you can put on a 1911."

And honestly, I'd say everyone would agree that is a bit of a design flaw (ergonomically), though one we all choose to live with. Hopefully part isn't as sharp as a 1911s or Hi Power's

TCB

Billy Shears
February 14, 2014, 01:38 PM
Here is a discussion of the same type of problem involving a Sig SP2022 and a close-up photo of the SP2022's slide release return spring. Since the SP2022 was introduced in 2002 (and it predecessors the SP2009/SP2340 were introduced in 1998), there has been plenty of opportunity for owners -including a quarter of a million French police- to screw up the slide release reassembly. I don't remember any discussion of the SP2022's design being "fundamentally flawed" as a consequence. And Nick Leghorn must not have thought the design presented a problem because he did not mention it in TTAG's review of the SP2022.
Which, along with the rest of the excessively nitpicky complaints he makes about the R51, as well as the way he seems almost to downplay the gun's virtues (e.g. accuracy, reduced muzzle flip, reliability with all ammo) with extremely brief mentions -- almost as afterthoughts, it looks like -- leads me to believe he was simply not conducting a fair and unbiased review. It looks like he had his mind made up not to like the gun from the start.

And honestly, I'd say everyone would agree that is a bit of a design flaw (ergonomically), though one we all choose to live with. Hopefully part isn't as sharp as a 1911s or Hi Power's
No, I can't say I would agree, never having put an idiot scratch on one of my 1911s or Hi Powers. It's really easy to avoid.

gc70
February 14, 2014, 02:12 PM
... leads me to believe he was simply not conducting a fair and unbiased review.

Whether a review is biased or not is fairly immaterial. Much more important are the nuggets of information a review may contain.

TTAG's review claims the R51 has a reassembly issue. With that starting clue, each of us will be able to perform our own review and determine whether or not the claimed issue poses a problem for us.

JohnnyBravo
February 14, 2014, 02:43 PM
TTAG lost me when they talked about "street cred" in their housekeeping article.

dastardly-D
February 14, 2014, 03:07 PM
I tried two out at the Harrisburg Sport show a week ago. Not having actually shot one, I can tell you both of them felt good in my hand but the trigger pull on both was hard ! The guy at the stand said they are set at 5lbs, but my Shield was much smoother , a totally different fell than on the R51 . Just my 2 cents , better to actually handle one before you buy one ..........;)

barnbwt
February 14, 2014, 11:30 PM
Can someone verify whether the trigger slides or pivots? That was an early question and I forget if it was resolved fo-realz. Nick's review doesn't mention this.

"TTAG lost me when they talked about "street cred" in their housekeeping article."
Me, too. Half the internet exploding because of a half-edited article is more in the realm of "cred" rather than ostensibly bogus "street cred." Requiring the boss to step in on behalf of one of his writers but stopping short of a retraction/rewrite to explain-away widespread legitimate criticism smacks more of defensiveness than accountability. It's pretty plain that many folks have it in for Remington for some perceived slight; probably some counter-culture instinct rooted in hipsterdom seeking to stick it to the Remington Man :D

Remington at least seems less poised to sell out the public for military contracts than some other brands out there. Though I do have an affinity to FNH products, myself, and can see why Nick favors them :cool:. I wouldn't know about H&K products.

TCB

rswartsell
February 15, 2014, 12:08 AM
It seems to me at this point that the trigger pivots, but who knows what is going on at Remington during the delayed introduction? BTW, I find it hard to credit an opinion that did not include shooting of this trigger when the factory prototypes were shot extensively by some pretty competent reviewers and the strong hints are for a long smooth pull and a very crisp break (intentionally long pull to fit to intended use and safety concerns).

I'm in, my order has been in for 2 weeks. Remington's success with the 1911 platform has far more weight to me than TTAG.

Sam1911
February 15, 2014, 10:58 AM
The trigger pivots. The takeup is long, two stage. It comes to a hard stop that breaks at maybe 5 lbs. The model I played with needed either a bit of wear, or a little smoothing, to make that break super crisp, but it wasn't bad.

gc70
February 15, 2014, 11:34 AM
The trigger pivots.

Could you shed any light on how or where the trigger pivots? In another thread (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=9308724&postcount=34), I had difficulty envisioning the trigger movement.

Sam1911
February 15, 2014, 11:54 AM
Nope, sorry. Have to wait until someone has one in-hand and can take it apart and give us some pics.

gym
February 16, 2014, 01:20 PM
There is a diagram on the internet of the internals, you just have to dig a little for it. Just Google blow up of the r-51, I remember seeing it a while back.

silicosys4
February 16, 2014, 01:23 PM
I was pretty excited about this gun until I saw that it has one of the design flaws that some Kahrs also have, the exposed slide stop spring that will cause malfunctions if assembled improperly
That in itself makes the gun an absolute no go for me.

Billy Shears
February 16, 2014, 02:12 PM
I was pretty excited about this gun until I saw that it has one of the design flaws that some Kahrs also have, the exposed slide stop spring that will cause malfunctions if assembled improperly
That in itself makes the gun an absolute no go for me.
Why? Assemble it correctly, and perform a functions check to make sure you have, and you won't have any problem.

That's like saying I refuse to buy a car, because it needs scheduled maintenance, and if I don't keep it up, the car will break down somewhere and leave me stranded.

Sam1911
February 16, 2014, 02:26 PM
Hey, some folks know they can't trust themselves with mechanical things.


And some folks are the obsessive sort who MUST have their guns clean, so they won't go test fire a gun to make sure it's working after a cleaning but before they carry it.

That's why they made disposable cameras, you know? Not everyone trusts themselves to put the film in right.

silicosys4
February 16, 2014, 03:03 PM
Well, I don't think I'm particularly obsessive, and its not that I don't trust myself with mechanical things. I just don't like delicate mechanical things when there are other options. Imo more like saying I refuse to buy a car that has a failure prone transmission when I can buy any number of cars that get the same gas mileage and performance that don't.
Maybe I'm wrong and reports will prove that the critical, tiny little exposed spring right next to moving parts is no problem. In that case I might reconsider and my interest might perk up again. Until then, I'm not too keen on being an early adopter on this one.

Nom de Forum
February 16, 2014, 03:36 PM
The asserted problematic reassembly issue is a non-issue because it applies to many pistols that are accepted as being outstandingly good. I have personally, and seen other people, incorrectly reassembled a Glock because I did not pay attention to the slide release spring and a 1911 because I did not pay attention to putting the sear/disconnector group in correctly. Both of these situations were readily apparent when function checked. I am sure members on this forum could list of examples of pistols where this can happen. It is not as if the R51 design makes it easy to misassemble and not be readily apparent until shooting. It does not have any part similar to an M60 GPMG gas piston that can be inserted backwards and go undetected until firing.

Most of the negative review statements on the R51 impress me as trivial and expressions of self-importance.

Gun Master
February 16, 2014, 04:34 PM
Are the barrel threads for future suppressors ?:confused:

Sam1911
February 16, 2014, 04:36 PM
They aren't threads. Just parallel rings to give you something to grip while taking the gun apart.

Billy Shears
February 16, 2014, 04:38 PM
No, those aren't threads; they're simply a knurled area on the front of the barrel to facilitate disassembly -- the particular disassembly procedure for this pistol involves grasping that part of the barrel to remove the barrel and slide, once you've taken the slide release out. The original Model 51 had a similar disassembly procedure, and had the exact same knurling on the barrel.

SFreed
February 16, 2014, 04:42 PM
That's why they made disposable cameras, you know? Not everyone trusts themselves to put the film in right.
Kind of off track, but can you still buy a disposable camera?? Or film, for that matter??

burley
February 16, 2014, 11:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jBPshuxphY

barnbwt
February 17, 2014, 09:35 AM
Wow, that video settles it; Nick really hates this gun :D :D :D. Anyone notice how ridiculously high he's holding it? I don't know how he's gripping it that way and still depressing the grip safety, but there's a 1/2" tail at the back end he's somehow filled up and is spilling over right behind the slide. Gotta see him shoot a Walther PP sometime :evil:

As to not being 'readily apparent' when the slide lock spring is in the wrong place; won't the slide stop simply not be sprung at all? As in, rack the slide back and see if there is any tension on the lever keeping it down with no magazine in? Doesn't seem that bad, frankly.

Fun fact: the infallible FNH Five-seven pistol originally had a far, far, far more fatal flaw that I never heard about in any reviews until my very first range trip. If a round was jutting too far forward when the mag was inserted (i.e. if you didn't tap the rounds all the way to the rear first) its tip would pop out the mag release spring inside the magwell, and causing the release to lose tension, and the spring and mag release would fall out of the gun (usually once the shooter dropped the first magazine). Field reassembly was nearly impossible. Until FNH changed the design, you never really knew whenever you pushed in a magazine, whether or not you would be able to lock in another afterward. That's a design flaw, and as such, FNH remedied the issue in short order (never did a recall, though).

"It's extremely easy to do when replacing the lever after takedown. If you don't insert it exactly right - if it's tilted upwards by say 1/16th of an inch - this happens. More worryingly, the improperly assembled firearm passes a function check" --Nick Leghorn in the video's comments
Bunk. His function check obviously doesn't examine the slide stop for being stuck up or down. Not installing any trigger-reset spring will have the same "undetectable" failure unless you check the trigger after reassembly. He says in the video the stop is "just barely" catching the slide and causing it to catch. Any reason you couldn't ride the slide stop if you were stupid enough to need to shoot the gun while it is assembled wrong?

TCB

Gun Master
February 17, 2014, 03:02 PM
I called several local retailers this past week, re: when the R1 "might be available." I got a wide range of answers, from "It'll probably be several months.":( to "I don't know.":confused: The latter of which I expect to be more correct.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it ? Kind of like the answer to, "When do you expect to get some .22 Long Rifle ammo ?";)

righteoushoot
February 17, 2014, 03:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jBPshuxphY
His thumb certainly looks long enough to at least be able to interfere with the slide release while cycling. Whether or not that's a matter of having to use a different grip, or that the gun might be too small for him, or a "Design Flaw" is another question.

OR, it has nothing to do with his grip.

jerkface11
February 17, 2014, 04:23 PM
A video on how the gun won't work if you don't put it together right? Is there a gun that does work if assembled incorrectly?

Orion8472
February 17, 2014, 04:47 PM
I should post one of how my Ruger Mark II "just won't function correctly" if that little bar doesn't go where it's supposed to when putting it back together. Sure enough, . . . you cannot cycle it! That's a poor design, Ruger!!

/sarcasm

JohnnyBravo
February 17, 2014, 05:52 PM
It's funny that Nick was able to tell the sample he handled at SHOT was assembled incorrectly but not the one he had for a review. :confused:

Gun Master
February 18, 2014, 02:05 PM
Is it just me, or does the trigger look weird, or what?

I hope it's not Glock plastic. Also, I'd like a more solid, sturdy trigger. If it's metal, it appears to be stamped out, patchwork, etc. I don't know.

Anybody out there know?:)

VA27
February 18, 2014, 05:54 PM
Looks cast to me. I'd prefer a solid trigger. That cut-out one will collect dirt and dust and be a bear to clean. It's not a deal breaker, I'll just fill it with hot glue or JB.

gym
February 18, 2014, 06:14 PM
I think these will be available sooner than most people think. Slickguns has had them up a few times already. I am afraid to jump in and buy one, "off the bat", would prefer to wait until the bugs get worked out.

barnbwt
February 18, 2014, 08:04 PM
I have to imagine a trigger is one of the lowest stressed parts on a gun, so I'm not too worried. I do think it's hyper-modern-race-gun design is unneeded on a swoopy/classy/streamlined form, but I'm also not sure if a spur, blade, or tapered trigger would look tons better or worse. Mainly I think it just needs to be the same color as the gun :p

It had a solid plastic-looking trigger in the early CAD shots:
http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/R-51-locked-back.jpg
Looks cheaper, so I guess the fancy one is better? :confused: I'm still pretty confident the first thing I will do with an R51 is blast/polish/blue the slide and polish/anodize the frame (maybe); the shiny renderings look so much better than what they ended up going with. Hard to imagine Bond pulling out a drab, dull, PPK with a shark-skin finish (not that the R51 should be nickled, either). The shiny rendering looks almost tuxedo worthy (as it is, it's only good as an "underwear gun" :D)

TCB

C0untZer0
February 18, 2014, 08:13 PM
I just noticed it has an internal extractor?

Nom de Forum
February 18, 2014, 10:19 PM
I just noticed it has an internal extractor?

It has to because the breech block moves within the slide.

meanmrmustard
February 19, 2014, 10:51 AM
I have to imagine a trigger is one of the lowest stressed parts on a gun, so I'm not too worried. I do think it's hyper-modern-race-gun design is unneeded on a swoopy/classy/streamlined form, but I'm also not sure if a spur, blade, or tapered trigger would look tons better or worse. Mainly I think it just needs to be the same color as the gun :p

It had a solid plastic-looking trigger in the early CAD shots:
http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/R-51-locked-back.jpg
Looks cheaper, so I guess the fancy one is better? :confused: I'm still pretty confident the first thing I will do with an R51 is blast/polish/blue the slide and polish/anodize the frame (maybe); the shiny renderings look so much better than what they ended up going with. Hard to imagine Bond pulling out a drab, dull, PPK with a shark-skin finish (not that the R51 should be nickled, either). The shiny rendering looks almost tuxedo worthy (as it is, it's only good as an "underwear gun" :D)

TCB
Ha! Underwear gun...now I'm going to watch Archer.

gym
February 19, 2014, 12:36 PM
I actually like the look, but am worried about the operation. It has more happening than a normal striker fired gun, and usually more parts and more stuff going on, means more to go wrong. Maybe after the first year or two, when I see no problems with them I will pick one up.
If they do what they did with the R1, there will be plenty of variations in a year.

Fishbed77
February 19, 2014, 04:15 PM
It has more happening than a normal striker fired gun, and usually more parts and more stuff going on, means more to go wrong.

By that rationale, the M1 Garand rifle should have never worked. ;)

gym
February 19, 2014, 04:31 PM
If it were a small pistol, it probably wouldn't. With all of the recalls on guns that are pretty straightforward in their development, I am sure there will be new problems with the design in the beginning. Why hurry and buy one?

hardluk1
February 19, 2014, 04:40 PM
<edit>

The design is from 1917 and those old ones still work well today for those lucky to own them so what not to think it would be any different from any other new gun to come along. Most all of us have more than a few hand guns to rely on so if there some new gun growing pains it should no bigger a deal than glock , sig, shield and xds and a few others that had new gun issues . But with this handgun being only an up dated almost 100 years old design it just might work well out of the box.

Ain't no use in worry'n about it , right. Buy it or don't.

I talked to my general store gun shop owner today . He has 8 of them coming to him and said if he had 50 coming he could sell all of them in that day. He's had that many calls for them but that's it for his allotment on the first order of r51's .

SharpsDressedMan
February 19, 2014, 04:53 PM
The biggest complaint against the original Remington 51 was that the breech blocks occasionally cracked, and there were no replacements.

gym
February 19, 2014, 04:59 PM
It's cheap enough, for those who rely on it as their only weapon, or possibly back up gun, I would wait anyway. It's just the fact that if something does go bad in the beginning, your gun will be laid up for months. After just getting back my xds, I would not be in the mood for another separation. A 2 or 3 month wait would be the smart move. I would like to see the gun and shoot it before buying it, otherwise a I could have snagged one last week on slick guns. On top of which, how many small 9mm pistols does one really want? Perhaps if it were a 40 or 45. I know that it's going to have to be pretty special for me to buy another small 9.
As far as old designs go, there is usually a reason they aren't made anymore, we will see if this one is any different. It's cheap enough.

JohnnyBravo
February 19, 2014, 06:11 PM
Seems like we have gotten some fluff pieces and a hit piece or two so far.

I'll wait until some folks on the forum have them and see what they think.

The design looks good, we'll just have to wait and see how Remington executes.

barnbwt
February 20, 2014, 12:01 AM
I'm mostly curious how Remington goes about deploying a sought-after hot-ticket item; it's been a while since they've had one of those :neener:

TCB

JohnnyBravo
February 20, 2014, 12:27 PM
I found this on YouTube.

Jeff Quinn finally got a sample to play with for a couple of days.

http://youtu.be/2IQEAKGXKt8

Gun Master
February 20, 2014, 02:42 PM
I found this on YouTube.

Jeff Quinn finally got a sample to play with for a couple of days.

http://youtu.be/2IQEAKGXKt8
Wow! Jeff Quinn gave the R51 a very good review, contrary to Nick Leghorn's. It seems that Jeff gave it an A+, while Nick only allowed B- or C (IMHO). It was difficult to assess the info Nick passed on. I noticed Jeff didn't complain about painful irritation in firing the gun. Also, he said he didn't understand why some people complained that it was difficult to reassemble. It's not, if you just follow the directions.:)

silicosys4
February 20, 2014, 03:30 PM
I have found gunblast to be a poor site on which to find objective reviews. Jeff Quinn told me himself through email that if a gun has any significant flaws, he quietly sends the gun back and doesn't publish a "review" on it....otherwise he won't keep getting free guns to "test".
Same problem with most "reviews" done by gunrags.

The main reason I don't trust published reviews anymore...No matter how many rags and writers gush over it, I'm still waiting for people who spend hard earned money on them to report back for better or for worse

Given the nature of the sites, I'd trust TTAG more than Gunblast.
What I don't get is people are all about watching TTAG debunk the G2 ammo thoroughly, then don't trust a review from the same site about a gun...People seem to be pretty emotionally wrapped up in the Remington.

JohnnyBravo
February 20, 2014, 03:48 PM
I have found gunblast to be a poor site on which to find objective reviews. Jeff Quinn told me himself through email that if a gun has any significant flaws, he quietly sends the gun back and doesn't publish a "review" on it

So apparently he didn't find any significant flaws?

silicosys4
February 20, 2014, 03:52 PM
Edit..I had a whole paragraph about Gunblast, but I think the glowing review of the Heizer single barrel .410/45 colt derringer right under the R51 review says enough, imo. The warm and snuggly Doubletap review makes me laugh..."felt recoil is stiffer than with most pistols"...." offers two quick shots of either 45 ACP or 9x19mm power, with an additional two shots that may be loaded in just a few seconds, carried in the butt of the pistol." which was followed directly by "most of the 9mm cases required a bump against the wood table, or prying from the chambers with fingernails."

Jeff Quinn has seemingly never met a firearm he doesn't like, and if there is something he doesn't like about a firearm he is reviewing, he won't tell you about it or he will gloss it over as a non-issue. Consequently, Gunblast is a site that holds no interest for me. I used to browse there but got tired of seeing glowing reviews of KNOWN problem guns, and found myself in a short time being able to predict the summary paragraph of every single review....."awesome! go buy one!"

I'll take TTAG's reviews any day, even if Nick seems to be in a mood during the test. I'd still rather have overly critical data than artificial praise

Orion8472
February 20, 2014, 04:47 PM
Watching a gun review doesn't really do a whole lot for me. Whether one person likes a gun or not only shows what THAT person thinks about it. It's mostly entertainment for me. Many people don't like Nutnfancy, but he is one who isn't afraid to give a negative report if it is deserving [in his opinion]. But yeah, gunblast.com . . . I can see that being one of those reviewers who get more to "review" if they give positive results. He's still fun to watch.

Vodoun da Vinci
February 20, 2014, 05:39 PM
Until Hickock45 or Destinee does the review it's all just "yadda yadda" to me...in the past I have found TTAG reviews to be pretty much what I found on the pistols I shot and owned.

Then again, I mostly found TTAG reviews after I already had an opinion and a gun in hand to compare it to. I thought their Glock 42 review was pretty much spot on...but Nick Leghorn didn't do that review.

I think we are gonna have to wait and shoot the R51 to really see how it pans out.

VooDoo

gym
February 20, 2014, 07:03 PM
Has Jeff , from "Gunblast" ever given a negative review? I don't think he has. Destinee, just started shooting a year or two ago, why anyone would take her review seriously is beyond me, her grip and stance isn't even near correct. She was cupping a large auto pistol on one, I had to shut it off. I don't mind but suddenly everyone who has a gun is doing reviews, even a few guys who can't speak English. They would be better off doing it in their native language. Or some guy who gets on and says he's going to review a gun, and it's his first gun, and hasn't fired it yet, It's like watching tryouts for American Idol.
I wonder how many people have had an accidental discharge while doing these videos. I would bet there are several. Or shot the guy who is making his directorial debut, I know it's cold, but true.
Hickock is just too nice to ever say anything negative about anything, but he will get his thoughts across, and is an amazing guy. I take him seriously. Nuti'n Fancy, also may be a mall ninja, but he knows a lot about guns, and can shoot, his reviews are informative.
There are a couple more that are ok, but not many, I like to first see if the person can shoot, that at least tells me if they know what to look for. If you can shoot like Hickock, you must know something about guns. It doesn't mean the driver knows how the race car is made, but he knows more than the average Joe, same with guns or anything else.
A pilot can explain what he likes or doesn't like in a plane a lot better than a passenger.
Many people who critique things avoid actually showing you how they do it, I prefer that they do it above average for me to take them seriously.

Gun Master
February 20, 2014, 09:56 PM
Has Jeff , from "Gunblast" ever given a negative review? I don't think he has. Destinee, just started shooting a year or two ago, why anyone would take her review seriously is beyond me, her grip and stance isn't even near correct. She was cupping a large auto pistol on one, I had to shut it off. I don't mind but suddenly everyone who has a gun is doing reviews, even a few guys who can't speak English. They would be better off doing it in their native language. Or some guy who gets on and says he's going to review a gun, and it's his first gun, and hasn't fired it yet, It's like watching tryouts for American Idol.
I wonder how many people have had an accidental discharge while doing these videos. I would bet there are several. Or shot the guy who is making his directorial debut, I know it's cold, but true.
Hickock is just too nice to ever say anything negative about anything, but he will get his thoughts across, and is an amazing guy. I take him seriously. Nuti'n Fancy, also may be a mall ninja, but he knows a lot about guns, and can shoot, his reviews are informative.
There are a couple more that are ok, but not many, I like to first see if the person can shoot, that at least tells me if they know what to look for. If you can shoot like Hickock, you must know something about guns. It doesn't mean the driver knows how the race car is made, but he knows more than the average Joe, same with guns or anything else.
A pilot can explain what he likes or doesn't like in a plane a lot better than a passenger.
Many people who critique things avoid actually showing you how they do it, I prefer that they do it above average for me to take them seriously.
Have you ever seen a bad review in "The American Rifleman?" What gun magazine has, that you can remember?

"Gun Tests" is the only one that I can think of. They tell the good, bad, and butt ugly.

At least in the videos, you can actually see the firing and performance taking place. Both Jeff and Nick seemed to have no difficulty firing the R51.

I don't believe in doing a "body slam" on the R51 (or any other guns for that matter), before they are actually used and tested by the general public. However, I fully support testing and studying them (the guns), prior to selling them, by as many people or groups as possible. Let us (the general gun public) be the judge.

All comments, positive, negative, and anything in between, are welcome, IMHO.:)

Mitlov
February 20, 2014, 10:01 PM
My favorite YouTube reviewer is Military Arms Channel. He goes into detail, points out things he likes and things he doesn't like, and justifies his opinion in each case. Even if I may not agree with him on every assessment, I can respect someone who takes a calm position and then backs it up with explanation.

As you said, I've never seen Gunblast do a negative review of anything. I've seen him give a glowing review of an over-under shotgun while conceding he doesn't know how to shoot moving targets and just sights down the barrel like a rifle (seriously, look up his recent Ruger Red Label review). Maybe that's okay for someone reviewing a home defense shotgun, but an over/under?

As for Destinee, I can respect her opinion as a "novice shooter's experience" with a particular weapon, and she's open about the fact that she's a relative novice. So am I. So long as someone is open about being a relative novice, I don't have a problem with them sharing their opinion.

atomd
February 20, 2014, 11:02 PM
I don't trust his review. When I first heard of this gun he was the only one (side by side with the guy from Remington that supposedly designed the gun and was also at shot show with it) that had his hands on one. They didn't bring it out for range day at the show even though everyone was looking for it. It's bigger than the original released specs.

Let's face it....too much talk. Not enough walk. No thanks.

gym
February 20, 2014, 11:06 PM
Destinee gets a lot of free stuff and sponsorship from gun company's. It's kind of like Dana Kilpatrick, who was supposed to come in and be the great female race car driver, yet has failed to win 1 race, according to a TV commentator last week, They, I guess her sponsors are deciding weather to give her spot to a male driver with a better record.
My feeling is you should earn the position before the cash and publicity is bestowed on you.
It's kind of like when Jerry Clooney was boxing, all hype. If you can back it up fine, but a good PR agent seems to be what many people have who "cash in on any sport".
I would love to see some young kid, like that 13 yr. old girl, come in and shoot the pants off of the know it all's.
Here is the worse review I have ever seen today on a Highpoint, no gun deserves what this guy who works for Guns and AMMO, Handguns. This wasn't pre planned, I stumbled on it when researching blow back actions. This guy hit a new low in the review he did, it's really funny to see how below the belt he went, check it out, we had enough bashing lately so try to take it in the context of what a supposed writer had the gall to write.
http://www.handgunsmag.com/2013/02/14/hi-point-c9-review/
It's not American Rifleman but close. It was an outright attack. By the way slickguns has the 9mm for $129 if anyone is interested.

andrewdl007
February 20, 2014, 11:14 PM
I may have missed it in this thread, but how do the pistol's dimensions compare to the original Model 51?

ricebasher302
February 20, 2014, 11:19 PM
It's kind of like Dana Kilpatrick, who was supposed to come in and be the great female race car driver, yet has failed to win 1 race

It's tough to win when Danica Patrick steals all your thunder with nothing but good looks and a similar name.

gym
February 21, 2014, 12:35 AM
You just didn't get the comparison Andrew, continuing from the prior post, comparing reviews and who does them. The credibility has to be called into question when a supposed pro, has no competitive wins at their given sport, whatever it is. Granted it's a sideways comparison but we need to question the reviewer in many of these cases, like in other sports.

barnbwt
February 21, 2014, 01:21 AM
"I don't trust his review. When I first heard of this gun he was the only one (side by side with the guy from Remington that supposedly designed the gun and was also at shot show with it) that had his hands on one. They didn't bring it out for range day at the show even though everyone was looking for it. It's bigger than the original released specs."

Honest question; how did Nick, some random blogger with little rep, get a pistol to play with for days a good couple weeks before anyone else? Especially considering they "weren't invited" and all that jazz? Just seems odd. I sure as heck haven't had a shot at getting one to mess with :D.

As I recall, the small specs were never 'official,' they were given offhand by one of the original shooters (Quinn?) after the unveiling, and picked up by bloggers and repeated as gospel. I have no idea why Remington didn't put out a correction, maybe they enjoyed the accidental buzz, but any idiot could tell you it would backfire on them in a huge way before initial sales when samples were reviewed, so I highly doubt it was an intentional ploy (the price hike probably was, though). Now all sorts of people are saying "well if it wasn't really 6" long, maybe it'll blow up in my face and kill my dog", or "will if it isn't actually illogically small compared to any other compact, who's to say it's lower frame isn't Zamak garbage?"

Totally ruined the gun's rep before they even sold a single one with an idiot PR move. They Chiappa'ed it (MKS'ed it to be specific (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/07/29/chiappa-adding-rfid-chips-to-their-guns-mks-suggests-concerned-consumers-wrap-the-revolver-and-their-head-in-aluminum-foil/))

TCB

Gun Master
February 21, 2014, 04:06 PM
Seems like the quest for functional gun info could be compared to wading the preverbal bovine fecal matter creek :
1. Have your high wader boots on.
2. Poke around with your prodding / walking staff.
3. Proceed in a slow, cautious manner.
4. Judiciously determine firm footing.
5. Attempt to not get bogged down in "the stuff."
6. After exiting, fling off as much of the pollution as possible.
7. Divert your gaze, in retrospect, absorbing all you can from your journey.

It can be as difficult/easy and egregious/pleasant as your persona allows.:)

Vodoun da Vinci
February 21, 2014, 04:43 PM
As for Destinee, I can respect her opinion as a "novice shooter's experience" with a particular weapon, and she's open about the fact that she's a relative novice. So am I. So long as someone is open about being a relative novice, I don't have a problem with them sharing their opinion.

Exactly. She's a lot like my niece and my Wife so her impressions are important to me. As well ,she seems to not have an ax to grind yet or take herself too seriously so what she thinks is relevant to me.

That said, the reviews are about MONEY not to informing us of facts - the reviews are bought and paid for by the gun companies with free guns/swag to reviewers I never met and are not me....what credibility to any of them have? Until they hit the market and I shoot one it's all just yadda yadda for hire, IMO. I'll shoot an R51 and make up my own mind...kinda like the G42. Nothing but crap reviews and bitter tears about it not being a single stack 9mm. I was not in the market for one or any .380 and convinced it was probably much like the pre release reviews and opinions made it out to be.

Then I shot one - my wife shot one. We bought one.

It'll be the same with an R51. I hope it succeeds in being something I wanna buy and I'll shoot one and decide if that's the case. Until then the reviews are interesting but won't define/can't define anything concrete for me.

VooDoo

JohnnyBravo
February 22, 2014, 01:49 PM
Interesting opinions for sure.

Jeff has admitted several times, and is not bashful about the fact that he doesn't post reviews of guns he doesn't like so it shouldn't come as a surprise to any thinking individual that he likes the R51 (or he wouldn't have posted the review). You won't catch him writing negative reviews because he will pan the gun instead.

He did mention the malfunctions with a couple of types of ammo so he seems to be reporting problems rather than ignoring them.

It didn't chew up his hands and he didn't have a problem with reassembly. I see no reason to think he's lying so where does he go from there?

So now we have a review from a guy who likes it and no one trusts because of his style and another review that is an obvious hit piece. :confused:

This is the stuff that makes internet forums fun. ;)

Gun Master
February 22, 2014, 03:44 PM
Interesting opinions for sure.

Jeff has admitted several times, and is not bashful about the fact that he doesn't post reviews of guns he doesn't like so it shouldn't come as a surprise to any thinking individual that he likes the R51 (or he wouldn't have posted the review). You won't catch him writing negative reviews because he will pan the gun instead.

He did mention the malfunctions with a couple of types of ammo so he seems to be reporting problems rather than ignoring them.

It didn't chew up his hands and he didn't have a problem with reassembly. I see no reason to think he's lying so where does he go from there?

So now we have a review from a guy who likes it and no one trusts because of his style and another review that is an obvious hit piece. :confused:

This is the stuff that makes internet forums fun. ;)
Ain't it ?:D

JohnnyBravo
February 23, 2014, 03:46 PM
I just wanted to add I thought it I thought it was great how TTAG placed the R51 on top of a 3.5 inch Wilson Combat pistol and then said the R51 was as big as a 1911 Combat Commander.

Yeah, they are the epitome of unbiased journalism alright. ROFL

http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/630x421xP1340533-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PEv-jVNkgm.jpg

Gary A
February 23, 2014, 04:53 PM
Putting one pistol on top of another is always misleading anyway because of perspective. In a photo, the top gun always looks a little larger and bottom one a little smaller. It's not a lot, but it's enough to be misleading and even deceptive, especially in a situation where small variations make a big difference.

silicosys4
February 23, 2014, 05:36 PM
I just wanted to add I thought it I thought it was great how TTAG placed the R51 on top of a 3.5 inch Wilson Combat pistol and then said the R51 was as big as a 1911 Combat Commander.

Yeah, they are the epitome of unbiased journalism alright. ROFL

http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/630x421xP1340533-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PEv-jVNkgm.jpg

Edit: That is a 4" commander. I'm looking at one right now, the dimensions look the same. Its definitely not a 3.5" wilson, look how far the muzzle of the slide protrudes past the frame.

3.6" Sentinel from Wilson's page:

http://wilsoncombat.com/new/new-images/handguns/ultralight-carry-sentinel/ultralight-carry-sentinel-1.jpg


The R51 looks to be about as big as a combat commander to me, give or take. Makes sense, I was looking at it in the video reviews thinking "wait...that is supposed to be a pocket pistol?" When I first heard about it, people were comparing it to guns the size of the Nano and the PM9 so I was a little surprised at how big it actually was in the reviews.
7 shots of 9mm vs 8 shots of .45 in the same size gun?
Hmmm....The more info that comes out, the more I feel the whole affair is a wee bit hyped.

Eb1
February 23, 2014, 10:02 PM
Looks like a fun and easy gun to carry. Just like the Bersa Thunder. I do not see what the big deal is. Either like it or don't. I don't particularly care for some handguns so I don't have them. The R51 looks much easier to IWB carry to me than any 1911 style auto pistol.

gc70
February 23, 2014, 10:43 PM
That is a 4" commander.

The TTAG article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/) said the gun was a Bill Wilson Carry Pistol (http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-bill-wilson-carry.asp#.UwqxBIWGfsw).

The R51 looks to be about as big as a combat commander to me, give or take.

Yep, give or take 1-1/8" in length and 1" in height.

silicosys4
February 23, 2014, 11:08 PM
The TTAG article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/) said the gun was a Bill Wilson Carry Pistol (http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-bill-wilson-carry.asp#.UwqxBIWGfsw).



Yep, give or take 1-1/8" in length and 1" in height.


The wilson gun you linked has a 4" barrel as stated right in the stats on Wilson's page, and the gun sitting under the r51 is not any of the 3.5" 1911's listed by Wilson as being for sale.
If you look at it you can see by the slide length its a 4" commander length, and if its a wilson combat carry, its only 0.6" shorter than a full size 1911 or true combat commander. My mistake, I'll give that its a little shorter than a true commander,
But
the ttag quote goes;
"With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size"
He never compares the r51 to a combat commander, and never to a 3.5" Wilson, like you say

Gun Master
February 23, 2014, 11:32 PM
Close, but with the consolidation of all the info (from everyone), the R51 is smaller, lighter, streamlined, and more user friendly than the Wilson/ Combat/ Commander types.

barnbwt
February 23, 2014, 11:33 PM
"The R51 looks to be about as big as a combat commander to me, give or
take."

I, too, recall them editing the "commander" bit to reflect the 'truth' about the gun. As I remember, the one pictured was more a combo of Officer and Commander in a few ways (admittedly not a 1911 guy, here), with the shorter barrel but longer grip (Nick would obviously be incapable of shooting an Officer length grip, remember? ;)). I would agree the R51 may have a grip the size of a commander, but the rest is smaller (by virtue of shorter fixed barrel design) and there isn't a huge beaver tail/hammer hanging off the end which everyone seems to neglect as if it isn't there jabbing you. And it is in a smaller caliber which many people will readily say they prefer to 45acp from a comparably sized/weighted pistol. Not anywhere insignificantly narrower, either ('yeah, only a fifth, or so' :rolleyes:)

1911 Officer; 6+1 rounds 45acp. 45acp is 18% larger than 9mm. 6+.18*6=7.08 --Ta Da! R51's capacity! How many fingers can you fit on an Officer grip again?

They're single stack guns, guys, multiply the rim diameter by the capacity to see how much difference there can be in capacity for a compact sized gun :rolleyes:. If someone had had the initiative to do this when the first specs were released, they'd have realized the overall height reputed by reviewers was flatly wrong. Scaling the photo would have revealed the OAL was flatly wrong.

It seems we've learned the recipe to scuttle any new product release; get one of the first reviewers to make some completely off-base claim about the product's capabilities, and wait for the bomb to explode once others get their hands on it. I hear the next iPhone has thought-activated controls, guys --super hot stuff to get all excited about!

"Hmmm....The more info that comes out, the more I feel the whole affair is a wee bit hyped."
Obviously. It had better be if Remington has a brain in their head. It's only the first handgun they've brought to market in like forever (a 1911 only half-counts). The 'hype' is mostly being created via frustrated rumor, though, so let's not put all the blame on the big green gorilla. Still not sure why people expect a gun utterly-divorced from the last 100 years of firearms development to have similar take-down to the great-great-great-great-grandson of the Browning :confused:

God, just imagine how bad this whole affair would have been if people would've had a whole year or more to gnash and speculate...smart move on the secret last-minute unveiling --the only smart move ;)

TCB

Gun Master
February 24, 2014, 12:22 AM
It certainly is not the elephant in the room, or the 800 lb. gorilla, but it is "the new kid on the block." If I don't buy one, I'll be surprised, and it'll have to be for a good reason.:D

gc70
February 24, 2014, 01:37 AM
the ttag quote goes;
"With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size"
He never compares the r51 to a combat commander, and never to a 3.5" Wilson, like you say

The TTAG article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/) originally described the R51 as "almost exactly the same size" as a "Commander-size 1911" on January 10, but that description was changed to a "smaller Officer sized 1911" on January 11.

The 3rd sentence of the article is clear: In particular, I wanted to compare the size and characteristics of the R51 to two handguns: the iconic GLOCK 19 and my Wilson Combat Bill Wilson Carry 1911.

A Bill Wilson Carry Pistol (http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-bill-wilson-carry.asp#.UwrbeoWGfsy) is 7.6" x 4.9" - a Commander slide on an Officer frame.

The caption of under the 3rd photo is also clear:R51 atop a Commander 1911

Instead of providing dimensions that would have allowed readers to knowledgeably judge for themselves, the article contained loose language and gave the impression the R51 was larger than it is (6.625" x 4.625").

silicosys4
February 24, 2014, 02:09 AM
The TTAG article (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/remington-r51-comparison/) originally described the R51 as "almost exactly the same size" as a "Commander-size 1911" on January 10, but that description was changed to a "smaller Officer sized 1911" on January 11.

The 3rd sentence of the article is clear:

A Bill Wilson Carry Pistol (http://wilsoncombat.com/new/handgun-bill-wilson-carry.asp#.UwrbeoWGfsy) is 7.6" x 4.9" - a Commander slide on an Officer frame.

The caption of under the 3rd photo is also clear:

Instead of providing dimensions that would have allowed readers to knowledgeably judge for themselves, the article contained loose language and gave the impression the R51 was larger than it is (6.625" x 4.625").

That's not what I get out of it. He posted a picture that shows the size comparison, its right there to see, I don't see any smoke and mirrors.
Besides, he wasn't lying. Except for the extra 0.6" in the grip of a combat commander, they are almost the same size. I have seen people stretch much more in describing two guns as almost the same size. It compares much more closely to an Officers size 1911 but the combat commander isn't a huge stretch as I see it.

From the ttag article
"With the smaller Officer sized 1911, the R51 is almost exactly the same size. It’s slightly shorter thanks to the lack of an external baseplate on the magazine, and the lack of a beavertail means that it’s overall length is less as well. But again it’s the details that matter, and even with Bill Wilson’s personal touches, there’s no doubt that the R51 is a much slimmer and sleeker design."

No doubt the gun carries a bit better, but dimensionally the r51 is not much smaller than a colt officer with a commander slide. A 3.5" officer-framed 1911 would be smaller than the R51. Not slimmer and lighter though.

gc70
February 24, 2014, 02:58 AM
That's not what I get out of it.

No problem. I prefer facts (6.625" x 4.625") over someone's impressions. I can compare facts to other facts, but comparing impressions to facts, not so much.

JohnnyBravo
February 24, 2014, 05:01 PM
Here's another guy shooting the R51 and he doesn't seem to get slide bite. The trigger doesn't seem to be much of an issue either.

Seems to have a lot of recoil though. :D

http://youtu.be/GP4D6WRJN5g

RUT
February 24, 2014, 05:32 PM
It just could be that fat handed folks are susceptible to it.

hardluk1
February 24, 2014, 07:09 PM
That nick guy TTAG did not get slide bit . No cuts or blood anywhere just a red area between thumb and idex finger from a pounding from 500 rounds from a lighter gun than he liked anyhow. He's was just a wuss.

Gun Master
February 24, 2014, 08:20 PM
Deleted.

kyarcher
February 26, 2014, 09:39 PM
When is the release date? Last I heard was Feb 1st

hardluk1
February 27, 2014, 04:38 PM
Still not released yet. Just hang in there . I am, I have too.

StrawHat
February 28, 2014, 08:37 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=745392

Combat Engineer
February 28, 2014, 12:48 PM
"...we've got a fixed barrel..." Daniel Cox, Product Manager, PARA/REMINGTON, Booth Staff, 2014 SHOT Show

From what I've seen it is not a true fixed barrel, like a PPK, or Makarov PM, or HK P7. Rather it is a removable slide -fit steel barrel on an aluminum frame, somewhat similar to the all steel WW2 era M1934 Beretta. Since it is not a true fixed barrel, there has to be some movement (under recoil) between the steel barrel and the aluminum frame... wonder if it will cause frame cracking? Don't know. They could make it a steel frame and then it would make for a good range workhorse in addition to a carry pistol.

Also looks big, about the size of the proven Sig P239.

Nice Art Deco styling, hope it does well.

goon
February 28, 2014, 01:07 PM
Nevermind.

BLU
March 2, 2014, 12:46 AM
Anyone had a chance to pick one up and check it out yet? My dealer hasn't received any yet. Kind of excited to hear a 'non-YouTube' review. I find myself in the market for a small 9mm pistol even though it will not be my carry piece. I almost picked up a Ruger LC9 despite the fact I'm not much into Tactical Tupperware. So, with the R51 coming out, it may be my latest addition.

InkEd
March 2, 2014, 03:40 AM
They just unveiled it a SHOT show. Probably at least 3 months until really on sale.

StrawHat
March 2, 2014, 08:22 AM
And yet Academy has had them in stock, until sold out.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=745392

mgmorden
March 3, 2014, 12:42 PM
Somebody saw that on Academy's website. I don't think we've yet confirmed that any live person every actually saw an R-51 in an Academy.

My guess is a little bit longer before you really see them - and they'll probably be rare for a while after that.

Tommygunn
March 3, 2014, 01:00 PM
Somebody saw that on Academy's website. I don't think we've yet confirmed that any live person every actually saw an R-51 in an Academy.

My guess is a little bit longer before you really see them - and they'll probably be rare for a while after that.
Yes --- I went to my local Academy Friday and no R51 in stock. The counterpersons had heard of the gun but had no idea if/when they'd be getting any, and that seems to be the general state of affairs at Academy with regards to all stock.

psyshack
March 3, 2014, 01:01 PM
I was interested in the 51 until I saw the grip safety.

cfullgraf
March 3, 2014, 01:41 PM
I got to fondle an R51 at the Great American Outdoor show. I liked it and will look to get one.

The Remington representative said they would be shipping at the end of February, which is about now.

Sam1911
March 3, 2014, 01:52 PM
<Merged>

Billy Shears
March 3, 2014, 09:33 PM
I've noticed a couple of people pointing out websites where R51s are listed as "out of stock" and saying, "they had them until they sold out." I don't think that's it at all. I think these companies are just gearing up for demand. I think they list them in preparation of getting orders, and in anticipation of people who want one signing up to be notified once they're in stock (whereupon those customers will hopefully order from them). In other words, just because they're listed on the site as out of stock, doesn't mean they were ever in stock, it just means that vendor has put up a web page to take orders for this pistol so they can start selling them as soon as possible once they become available. These vendors are just trying to steal a march on their competitors.

barnbwt
March 5, 2014, 11:22 PM
Cue Carmina Burana with hoofbeats in the background...

http://www.gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=r51

:D :D :D

Maybe we'll get some new reviews in, oh, 2 days, 21 hours :D

TCB

Eb1
March 6, 2014, 12:51 AM
It will be a while before I get my R51. I ended up buying a 1911-A2 GI Series .45 ACP and a Beeman X2 .22/.177 Pellet Gun.
I figured if the R51 hangs around long enough for me to get another gun for the collection then I'll buy it.

I guess the Bersa .380 with 90 grain XTP +P @ 1202 fps @ 10 feet will have to continue to be my carry pistol.

Babylon
March 7, 2014, 10:42 PM
Hello everyone. First time poster long time lurker ;)
Just curious what everyone thinks about the new R-51. It looks awesome to me but I am not sure if it lives up to all the hype. I think it would be a great carry gun for a woman. What do you guys think?

mrvco
March 7, 2014, 10:57 PM
I'll stick with my Kahr CW-9. I haven't seen an R-51 in the wild, but I'm not crazy about the grip safety or how it goes back together after being field stripped.

VA27
March 7, 2014, 10:59 PM
Thoughts? I think I want one. Whether it's a keeper or not remains to be seen, but I have hopes.

JTHunter
March 8, 2014, 01:47 AM
Babylon - I was reading a review a couple of days ago where the writer didn't like it. He said that, for the first time in years, he got "slide bite". He did admit though that he had large hands. If you have small to mid-size hands, you might be okay.

He also had the same problem with the grip safety that mrvco did.

bigfatdave
March 8, 2014, 03:04 AM
Looks like an interesting gun.

I can afford one as a curiousity, whether it shakes out to be a good carry gun remains to be seen, but I'm cautiously optimistic.

I like grip safeties, I like slim autoloading pistols, I like "small for caliber" pistols, I like the sights they're putting on these, and I like oddball mechanical actions in guns
... and the griping reviews seem silly to me. (oh noez, if you put it together wrong, it doesn't work! oh noez, the slide goes back & forth rapidly!)

BryanDavis
March 8, 2014, 04:29 AM
Could someone post pics?

Or could someone who actually owns one post a review?

Or could someone just tell me what caliber the damn thing is?

230RN
March 8, 2014, 04:40 AM
Parenthesis: The CW-9 can also be reassembled incorrectly. The instructions specifically state that if you don't do it right you have to send it back to the factory.

The PF-9 has almost the same fault, but you can recover by shaking it in all three axes and various orientations while wiggling the slide. Close parenthesis.

Mike J
March 8, 2014, 09:15 AM
I am interested in one but for right now I am taking a wait & see attitude.

JWH321
March 8, 2014, 09:32 AM
I can't seem to get a good idea of the size of this gun. I see stuff describing it as a good CCW weapon, then I see other stuff describing it as Colt Commander size.

Anyone seen one yet?

JRWhit
March 8, 2014, 09:43 AM
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSBzCPz0f4gBiaJWxXSBKypBnIOQNK24knKZnn6iIe8eXyLANE
It is 9mm middle ground. About the size of a Ruger LC9.
From what I can tell from reviews. If you have rough hands it's a pretty good shooter, otherwise it is abusive.

JRWhit
March 8, 2014, 09:53 AM
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSNfslvtrHDOZ0hcN_FzP0kwskXPJhKmUlKvO5BZZwTdLN5Kq6O
Here is a better size reference.

The Lone Haranguer
March 8, 2014, 10:07 AM
I'd have to see one first.

9 fingers
March 8, 2014, 10:11 AM
I checked Gunbroker to see what they are going for and there are more crazies out there then I thought. The bids were approaching $600 for the R51!
I believe the list price is $420. I guess they gotta have one NOW!!! I will wait a few months. And for the poster above that needed to see a picture or find out what the caliber is.............It is on Remington's website and all over the web if you search "Remington R51".
9 fingers

Orion8472
March 8, 2014, 10:16 AM
At this point, there have been a few lengthy threads on the Remington R51 already. I am more interested in seeing a review from someone who actually got/gets one. If that's me [I have one on order], then I'll do it.

Travtastik
March 8, 2014, 10:22 AM
I got to shoot 8 rounds with one last weekend at the 3 gun nation regionals. I was not really impressed with it. First shot the slide rolled over my hand. Didn't bite it just left a slight grease mark. I had to really adjust my grip to keep my large hand out of the way. Once I found good grip that worked for me I was out of ammo. 8 rounds really isn't enough to get a good idea o what it will do.

There was about 15-20 guys there shooting and it seemed they guys with large hands had issues slide bite or just gripping the pistol right. The guys with smaller hands had no issues with it. A guy in my squad was on the phone with his LGS right after shooting it trying to get one.

Goju
March 8, 2014, 11:30 AM
My LGS called me yesterday to let me know that my R51 has or will ship and I should be able pick it up Wednesday. After reading all the information available to date about the pistol, I decided the price was acceptable to be a beta tester. Have to shake my head at the current GB prices; had this been a $500 or more piece I would not have dived in without a lot more first hand ownership evaluations. For reference, my LGS OTD cost was $430. Guess we'll see soon enough if this can be a real CC gun, or a range novelty that resides in the safe.

Babylon
March 8, 2014, 02:24 PM
Here is a really good review...

http://becauseguns.com/pin/365645/

Mitlov
March 8, 2014, 02:55 PM
Could someone post pics?

Or could someone who actually owns one post a review?

It hasn't gone on sale to the general public yet. Wait a week or so and this forum should be overflowing with user reviews.

Or could someone just tell me what caliber the damn thing is?

9mm Luger.

Desertrat357
March 8, 2014, 02:56 PM
I am definitely interested in it, I look forward to reading the review that was linked. I am glad I wasn't the only one who noticed the crazy prices they are bringing on GB. I'll wait till the dust settles before I get serious. Plus, that will be enough time hopefully for some more first hand experiences to come out.

shadow9
March 8, 2014, 06:22 PM
I checked Gunbroker to see what they are going for and there are more crazies out there then I thought. The bids were approaching $600 for the R51!
I believe the list price is $420. I guess they gotta have one NOW!!! I will wait a few months. And for the poster above that needed to see a picture or find out what the caliber is.............It is on Remington's website and all over the web if you search "Remington R51".
9 fingers

Just looked - $629 from Northern Firearms (http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=399401773). :banghead: Kinda reminds me of when the Solo came out, the XD-S .45, etc. etc.

I'll wait till I can shoot it.

Gun Master
March 8, 2014, 07:03 PM
:what: I think I'll play the waiting game !:cool:

JohnnyBravo
March 8, 2014, 07:10 PM
I can't seem to get a good idea of the size of this gun. I see stuff describing it as a good CCW weapon, then I see other stuff describing it as Colt Commander size.

Anyone seen one yet?
Think of a M&P Shield with a slide that is 1/2 inch longer and a grip that you can get all your fingers on without the gun being any taller than the Shield.

Gun Master
March 8, 2014, 07:39 PM
They were supposed to be on the market Feb. 15 2014.

Wha' Hoppened ?:confused:

r1derbike
March 8, 2014, 10:16 PM
Going to wait a year or so 'til the teething issues are addressed. Then look again.

Just picked-up an XDm 9mm 4.5 in., so good for a big boat anchor ATM. NIB, half a year free range membership, lane and ammo discounts. Couldn't pass that one up.

I'm really flummoxed I shoot my XD-S .45 better, though. Could be the 1300 rounds through it.

Have to retrain for light recoil and long sight radius, I guess? :D

Will be watching/reading the reviews on the Rem., all I may find...

If you enjoyed reading about "Remington R51" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!