Remington R51

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.

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.

R51 Info

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).

R51 (Who Can Doubt Now?)

marklmurray said:

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

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

Click to expand...

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!

skt239 said:

The truth about guns did a very interesting review about the R51.

Click to expand...

Today's TTAG reviews (first and followup) are very interesting and the discussion of the reassembly "trick" is particularly informative. But the recurring complaint that "TTAG wasn’t on the guest list to Big Green’s 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.

R51 review by The Truth About Guns

On the other hand, we need to try to be objective. Read the review TTAG.

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

>>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.

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.

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.

The truth about guns loves the diamondback db9, I wouldn't trust them!

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.

Mark, that was EXCELLENT information. Thank you!! Looks like Remington did the takedown very well on this pistol.

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.

Click to expand...

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.


.

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.

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

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.

In my you tube wonderings I discovered that Gen Patton sometimes carried. I forget weather it was the .32 or the .380.

Click to expand...

According to this Youtube video from the National Firearms Museum, Patton carried a .380 Remington 51.

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

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" ). 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" . 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?

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<still has an internal one, though >, and the lack of a beavertail means that it’s overall length is less as well<don't forget that Condition One hammer, too >. 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.

Click to expand...

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

TCB

TTAG's Nick Leghorn's R51 Review

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.

Ok, well I guess I was a bit harsh..

Imo, it's a turd.

hardluk1 said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

TTAG has changed its tune in the size comparision article.

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:
length 7.6" - height 4.9"
Remington R51:
length 6.625" - height 4.625"

gc70 said:

TTAG has changed its tune in the size comparision article.

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.

Click to expand...

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...

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.

It's early but I'm calling BS.