gglass
Member
This entire pistol is a mutt that gets its looks from these gun designs:
Slide - M&P
Slide Serrations - PPQ
Lower Receiver - M&P (top portion)
Grip - FNX
Trigger - Glock
Trigger Guard XDS
Put it all together and you get a polymer mutt.
Remington showing new handguns
- Thread starter LeftyTSGC
- Start date
- Status
Slide - M&P
Slide Serrations - PPQ
Lower Receiver - M&P (top portion)
Grip - FNX
Trigger - Glock
Trigger Guard XDS
Put it all together and you get a polymer mutt.
SC Shooter
Member
When they first announced the R51, I waited anxiously for their arrival. I own an original Model 51 and couldn't wait to get my hands on the updated version of the John Pederson design. Now a couple of years later, my interest has waned. Lesson learned: just like it is not wise to go to a new restaurant until they get the bugs out of their new business, you shouldn't buy a hot off the line gun until They have been tested and reviewed.
gglass
Member
Now you tell me!
According to my dealer and his distributor, my R51 was the first in Indiana. My joy of being the first was short lived, as I had to return it to Remington within a couple weeks of its purchase due to at least nine MAJOR malfunction types. (I would swear that my R51 was built by Murphy himself.) I waited for a fix that never came and finally demanded my money back from Remington, which they happily complied.
Even when it is reintroduced, I don't think I would ever own one again. I don't see how they can take a gun that had so many major issues and turn it into a gun that has zero issues. It just defies reason.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"They should just reissue the 51 instead"
Yeah, I'm sure they still have all the metal shapers oiled up and ready to go
The 51 was hardly perfect, originally. Broken slides and breechblocks, dontcha know. The R51 is a distinct improvement in several ways, but you still have to make the stupid thing to a decent standard --and that goes for any design.
The early positive hands-on reports of the newer models being rolled out does suggest that Rem has either fixed their QC problems, or at least taken the Pineville Para USA plant out the loop (who would have thought a plant full of employees about to be laid off would give their work quality short shrift?)
"at least nine MAJOR malfunction types"
Ooh, list please. The Pedersen action does have some real and potential advantages over others, but I do agree it seems to have the potential for types of issues we aren't used to normally (the non-catastrophic out of battery thing, for one).
"I don't see how they can take a gun that had so many major issues and turn it into a gun that has zero issues. It just defies reason."
Nonsense. The Model 51 worked fine, as far as general reliability (the break issues were due to fatigue after many years and a lack of understanding of fracture mechanics at the time), so logic suggests the same is true of the R51. The trick is just figuring out exactly where Remington screwed up.
--Bad machining all over at basically every interface
--Extremely loose disconnector boogers up the whole FCG function generally
--Poor finish or design of the slide interior, which pits sharp nitrided steel against MIM bolt components
--Some of the worst barrel chambering that has been seen this or last century
--Plainly cheap magazines
We have to keep in mind that the Pedersen action was contemporary with Browning designs; they don't respond well to modern crap manufacture standards. While Remington has updated some aspects of the design, it has clearly not had enough time to mature into a super-simplified, incredibly tolerant and fool proof invention like your tilting-barrel Browning and SIG pistols have. And even those guns are only as consistent as they are since decades of fumbling around producing jammomatics has yielded processes that can be copied by makers for new products. The R51 simply isn't a turn-key project yet, though it is obvious Remington did not realize that at the time and tried to 'wing it'
TCB
Yeah, I'm sure they still have all the metal shapers oiled up and ready to go
The 51 was hardly perfect, originally. Broken slides and breechblocks, dontcha know. The R51 is a distinct improvement in several ways, but you still have to make the stupid thing to a decent standard --and that goes for any design.
The early positive hands-on reports of the newer models being rolled out does suggest that Rem has either fixed their QC problems, or at least taken the Pineville Para USA plant out the loop (who would have thought a plant full of employees about to be laid off would give their work quality short shrift?)
"at least nine MAJOR malfunction types"
Ooh, list please
. The Pedersen action does have some real and potential advantages over others, but I do agree it seems to have the potential for types of issues we aren't used to normally (the non-catastrophic out of battery thing, for one)."I don't see how they can take a gun that had so many major issues and turn it into a gun that has zero issues. It just defies reason."
Nonsense. The Model 51 worked fine, as far as general reliability (the break issues were due to fatigue after many years and a lack of understanding of fracture mechanics at the time), so logic suggests the same is true of the R51. The trick is just figuring out exactly where Remington screwed up.
--Bad machining all over at basically every interface
--Extremely loose disconnector boogers up the whole FCG function generally
--Poor finish or design of the slide interior, which pits sharp nitrided steel against MIM bolt components
--Some of the worst barrel chambering that has been seen this or last century
--Plainly cheap magazines
We have to keep in mind that the Pedersen action was contemporary with Browning designs; they don't respond well to modern crap manufacture standards. While Remington has updated some aspects of the design, it has clearly not had enough time to mature into a super-simplified, incredibly tolerant and fool proof invention like your tilting-barrel Browning and SIG pistols have. And even those guns are only as consistent as they are since decades of fumbling around producing jammomatics has yielded processes that can be copied by makers for new products. The R51 simply isn't a turn-key project yet, though it is obvious Remington did not realize that at the time and tried to 'wing it'
TCB
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
If by 'impossible' you mean 'not worth any living human's time or energy' instead of 'unworkable due to laws of physics,' then yes. They'd have to redesign the parts and production of the gun entirely --from scratch-- to even attempt what you describe, and the simplifications that make modern 1911 production commercially viable never had a counterpart in the Pedersen gun. It'd be a quantum leap to make those things on a CNC, which is why I stated that it'd be just as difficult to design an entirely new gun with better commercial appeal (9mm) that plays into modern production methods, which the R51 certainly does.
If only Remington could employ those methods competently.
We've seen this song and dance with the repro Lugers, and the recurring theme is it ain't that profitable because those designs are stupid expensive to make compared to alternatives. I think the only reason old lever guns and revolvers can be made commercially is they are very low parts-count items, which mitigates a lot of the machining complexity those old organic devices (curvy, odd shapes, often in three dimensions). And even those are very expensive for what you end up with, and somewhat more prone to problems themselves.
TCB
If only Remington could employ those methods competently.
We've seen this song and dance with the repro Lugers, and the recurring theme is it ain't that profitable because those designs are stupid expensive to make compared to alternatives. I think the only reason old lever guns and revolvers can be made commercially is they are very low parts-count items, which mitigates a lot of the machining complexity those old organic devices (curvy, odd shapes, often in three dimensions). And even those are very expensive for what you end up with, and somewhat more prone to problems themselves.
TCB
Armybrat
Member
Reissue the 51? 
Mine was carried by the wife's grandpaw in the 1920s until the '50s in Central Texas. Most of the slide finish is gone, but she still shoots sweet...
Mine was carried by the wife's grandpaw in the 1920s until the '50s in Central Texas. Most of the slide finish is gone, but she still shoots sweet...
gglass
Member
Out of battery firing"They should just reissue the 51 instead"
Yeah, I'm sure they still have all the metal shapers oiled up and ready to go
The 51 was hardly perfect, originally. Broken slides and breechblocks, dontcha know. The R51 is a distinct improvement in several ways, but you still have to make the stupid thing to a decent standard --and that goes for any design.
The early positive hands-on reports of the newer models being rolled out does suggest that Rem has either fixed their QC problems, or at least taken the Pineville Para USA plant out the loop (who would have thought a plant full of employees about to be laid off would give their work quality short shrift?)
"at least nine MAJOR malfunction types"
Ooh, list please
"I don't see how they can take a gun that had so many major issues and turn it into a gun that has zero issues. It just defies reason."
Nonsense. The Model 51 worked fine, as far as general reliability (the break issues were due to fatigue after many years and a lack of understanding of fracture mechanics at the time), so logic suggests the same is true of the R51. The trick is just figuring out exactly where Remington screwed up.
--Bad machining all over at basically every interface
--Extremely loose disconnector boogers up the whole FCG function generally
--Poor finish or design of the slide interior, which pits sharp nitrided steel against MIM bolt components
--Some of the worst barrel chambering that has been seen this or last century
--Plainly cheap magazines
We have to keep in mind that the Pedersen action was contemporary with Browning designs; they don't respond well to modern crap manufacture standards. While Remington has updated some aspects of the design, it has clearly not had enough time to mature into a super-simplified, incredibly tolerant and fool proof invention like your tilting-barrel Browning and SIG pistols have. And even those guns are only as consistent as they are since decades of fumbling around producing jammomatics has yielded processes that can be copied by makers for new products. The R51 simply isn't a turn-key project yet, though it is obvious Remington did not realize that at the time and tried to 'wing it'
TCB
Empty casing stovepipe
Live round stovepipe miss-feed
Magazine Failing to feed next round
Double round feeding
Aluminum trigger drag against the frame (Severely gouged trigger that got worse with each pull)
Slide not staying open on last round
Peening of the slide against breech block
Rear sight kept coming loose
More issues if I thought about it longer...
The pistol rarely fired two rounds consecutively. It was a great failure training device though.
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
I met an older gent about my age, 75, at a gun show last year and he told me he had a 51 in 380acp. He lived about 8 miles from my farm and I asked if he would let me shoot it some time. Well, he came about 3 times this past year and he would bring it for me to shoot. That is the best pointing pistol I ever put in my hands and I never had any problems with it. I hope Remington can fix the problems with the newer R51 in 9mm as I would like to have one. I like Remington guns, at least the ones I have here, that I have hunted with for many years. Hence I do not have the animosity that others have about the R51. It can be fixed--I hope. Snoop
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"Peening of the slide against breech block"
Pictures or more info, please, that's a new one. The slide was substantially harder than any other part on my gun (instead, its sharp cam edges gouged the breech bolt), so I'm very surprised to hear this.
TCB
Pictures or more info, please, that's a new one. The slide was substantially harder than any other part on my gun (instead, its sharp cam edges gouged the breech bolt), so I'm very surprised to hear this.
TCB
zaitcev
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2016
- Messages
- 1,256
Ibmikey
Member
Contrary to those who continue to doubt Remington and their products, I purchased :
A blue 1911, a stainless 1911, a Bushmaster, DPMS, RM 380 and an R51. To date and many thousands of rounds through the AR's and hundreds through the others ( my R 51 has over 500) and I am still waiting for a. Catastrophic failure in at least one, after all that is what the forum members are saying.
Seriously I am not a lover of Remington but only wish to report my experiences, the RM 380 and R 51 have run smoothly and relialiby. One of my R 51 mags induces malfunctions but R.E.M. Is sending me a new one and gave me instructions on how to correct the others. The pistol is easy to shoot with minimal recoil but they need to offer different height front sights as an option.
By the way the Hog in the picture (350+ pounds) was taken with an AAC Blackout Handi Rifle, a company Remington bought and then shut down, for that I am not a happy person.
A blue 1911, a stainless 1911, a Bushmaster, DPMS, RM 380 and an R51. To date and many thousands of rounds through the AR's and hundreds through the others ( my R 51 has over 500) and I am still waiting for a. Catastrophic failure in at least one, after all that is what the forum members are saying.
Seriously I am not a lover of Remington but only wish to report my experiences, the RM 380 and R 51 have run smoothly and relialiby. One of my R 51 mags induces malfunctions but R.E.M. Is sending me a new one and gave me instructions on how to correct the others. The pistol is easy to shoot with minimal recoil but they need to offer different height front sights as an option.
By the way the Hog in the picture (350+ pounds) was taken with an AAC Blackout Handi Rifle, a company Remington bought and then shut down, for that I am not a happy person.
Orcon
Member
I think it looks like the bastard-child of a Walther and a Hi-point. Yuck, no thanks!
zaitcev
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2016
- Messages
- 1,256
One feature of this slide design that I do not see mentioned is that you must hold the gun very securely with your strong hand and you must drive your support hand down onto the weapon. If you do not do that, it's very easy to lose the grip on the slide. This is more of a problem on Springfield XD(m), but Walther PPQ suffers from it for an extent too, although it helps that PPQ has deeper cuts. A slab-sided slide of Glock is somewhat more user-friendly in this regard. Not that it's essential or anything, but you can see novices having trouble adapting at times, because as soon as they start charging the gun they let the muzzle flip up and lose the grip.
- Status
