Remington R51

[barnbwt]

"I would find his comments a lot more credible if he didn't have a Glock bench mat as a background. It kind of compromises any claims of objectivity."

Tactical Existence: "So, here is the now-infamous Remington R51..." moving along...

I thought it was a decent review until I saw the others. He did the whole "sharp recoil" schtick while it was obvious he was getting both very rapid shots and startlingly little wrist deflection in the videos (the guy obviously knows his craft, but the recoil looked very low for anyone shooting a 9mm). He certainly never complained again for 300 rounds.

The best was this part at 6:40 of 'the gun you thought you wanted' in which he states "just being able to shoot 102 rounds consecutively [so far] doesn't solve those issues for me" which sounds awfully biased. He never does explain what he did to get the gun which bound up completely after 2 mags in the first video turned into the piece that ran +140 before the next issue :scrutinty: (shooting assorted ammo specifically to see if it would jam the gun, mind you ). Throughout all his videos it seems pretty obvious something was wrong early on, yet he keeps whipping the wounded pony to see if he can kill it & prove its inferiority

Anybody wonder if his disconnector was binding up as it went up/down, causing the slide to shave metal off its tip with every shot? I am. That would explain the damage to the frame/slide right around there, the metal shavings, the binding both forward and backward, the trigger being intermittently disconnected after cycling, everything. I think he's lucky it didn't run off on him. +P ammo seemed to drastically speed up the issues, as well; I don't suppose this would be the first time a company advertised a gun as stouter than it really was, eh S&W . No excuse, but a possibility.

Regarding the trigger; if any of the triggers on my guns could pivot 10degrees side to side I would be taking them apart to see if it was broken across the pivot or shipping it to the maker to check for the same. Why would it intentionally be designed with a .05" oversize hole? So why assume that's how it should be?

That super-crappy slide machining is almost certainly due to the mill operator loading the wrong tool into the CNC tool carriage pocket (happens all the time with poor shop tool control & programming) causing the roughing operation with big step-downs to gouge past the proper finished surface. The subsequent ball/rounded endmill operations that smooth out the rest of the slide are left cutting dead air afterward. We are well past the time of "sloppy machining" you can blame on clumsy manual-mill machinists' skill; this is the fault of careless tool-loaders not keeping track of their inventory. I would surmise a 3/8" endmill was loaded instead of a 1/4" (gouges are ~.03", and if that ballmill operation was supposed to go about .03" deeper to finish the pocket, the two added together are about a 1/16" radius error that would only be seen on the sides ). Obviously a QC inspector should have noticed and rejected this part immediately. Obviously the QC inspector at Para was an inflatable carpool dummy

At this point, I'm certain he got exactly what he discounted as merely fanboy claims; a lemon. And while Remington seems to be putting out a lot of R51 lemons, the review is presented as a review of the platform, complete with un/recommendation for other buyers, so it kind of makes sense to make a point of getting a working copy. Instead of saying the operation is unreliable (which is indeterminate at present) he should say production is extremely uneven with many bad examples. A minor point, but worth noting, since it seems that those with properly made copies tend to absolutely love them

"Hard metal moving against soft metal could prove to be a problem that is solvable."
I'm not entirely sure the aluminum is the problem. The wear is occurring where the slide passes close (the camming lugs on the slide) and where the slide scrapes over the disconnector. If the slide is colliding with the frame due to improper clearances or scrapping off shavings from the disconnector, no metal would hold up well. I've heard zero reports of peeening or galling of the locking recess, which is precisely where I expect to see issues due to softness. My totally theoretical guess at this point is the disconnectors suck (probably a cheap little stamped piece that has burs all over it)

TCB

 

[JRH6856]

Regarding the trigger; if any of the triggers on my guns could pivot 10degrees side to side I would be taking them apart to see if it was broken across the pivot or shipping it to the maker to check for the same. Why would it intentionally be designed with a .05" oversize hole? So why assume that's how it should be?

Looking at the trigger assbly in the frame, it is apparent that the wobble is due to an oversize hole in the trigger. I can't see any apparent reason for it. The pin passes through the frame, a loop in the trigger return spring, the trigger, loop in spring, frame. The trigger appears to be molded plastic. Since the pre-release photos showed a solid trigger, I wonder if the switch to the skelotonized trigger was a last minute change, perhaps to reduce costs and they just got the mold wrong. There may be a future for an aftermarket trigger. I will try shimming the hole when I get around to detail stripping but that will be after I make sure this won't be going back to Remington anytime soon.

At this point, I don't see any problems with the disconnector. The mag release is really stiff though.

 

[barnbwt]

"Looking at the trigger assbly in the frame, it is apparent that the wobble is due to an oversize hole in the trigger."

I still stand by my point of "why would you possibly do that intentionally"

Same thing for "why would you make the trigger pivot hole plastic." At least that part can't possibly be that complicated to make a better version of.

*sigh* Remington, *sigh*

TCB

 

[gyvel]

In essence, we are looking at a pistol that has an internal hammer with no external manual safety other than a grip safety.

That is a setup that I am not comfortable with.

YMMV

 

[Flashcube]

Plastic? The trigger is aluminium (or some other non-magnetic white metal). It's coated with a thick black paint that makes it look a bit odd. Where it's rubbed against the frame a silver metal has shown through on my trigger.

 

[JRH6856]

Plastic? The trigger is aluminium (or some other non-magnetic white metal). It's coated with a thick black paint that makes it look a bit odd. Where it's rubbed against the frame a silver metal has shown through on my trigger.

Painted aluminum was my first thought, but having not had it to the range, mine doesn't have any wear scraping. I scraped at the top of the trigger inside the frame and made a pretty deep gouge. without hitting any white metal which is why I then assumed some sort of plastic. I didn't think paint could be that thick. But I'll go with heavily painted aluminum.

As to why the hole is so big. I'm guessing they just rushed the change from the solid trigger with inadequate QC.

Looks like Thursday is range day.

 

[JRH6856]

In essence, we are looking at a pistol that has an internal hammer with no external manual safety other than a grip safety.

That is a setup that I am not comfortable with.

YMMV

The concept bothered me too until I got it in my hands. Now it just seems to make sense. A lot more than the Glock system.

The grip safety is not stiff but does require deliberate pressure. It definitely blocks the trigger, and feels like it may block the sear as well. Doesn't seem to have a firing pin block but the FP spring is really stiff. and the pin has to move about a 1/4" to reach the primer.

The trigger is different from any other gun I have. It is crisp at 5-5.5#, but that is after a short take up that requires less pressure but is not loose, either. Actually it feels a bit like a staged trigger...sort of.

 

[JRH6856]

Headspace/Firing Out of Battery (FOOB)/Fail to Return To Battery (FRTB)

I seen several vids of Failure to return to battery and firing out of battery. Once again, haven't been to the range yet, but:

Most FRTBs were reported on the first round from the mag. I loaded up a mag of dummy rounds I made up using MBC 9Cone and the only way the first round created a FRTB was if I rode the slide down. Releasing the slide from lock and letting it drop chambered the rounds every time. So, I decided to test further with other rounds. I had sanother dummy made up from plunk testing my BHP. This one would not fully chamber. In fact, the bullet was jammed on the lands with the slide clearly out of battery. I had to put the rear sight on the end of a piece of 2x4 and lean on it to eject the round. It ejected the case leaving the bullet stuck in the barrel and I had to tap it out with a rod.

I slugged the barrel (since I already had bullet stuck in it) with the following results:

Bullet diameter: 0.3565
Lands:............. 0.3460
Grooves:.......... 0.3560​

I then plunked an empty case, a Federal 115g FMJ, and a Remingtion 147g Golden Sabre and and older dummy with a different lead cone bullet. and took measurements.

Diameter of bullets tested:

L9 Cone: 0.3565
Fed FMJ: 0.3550
Rem GS: 0.3470​

Except for the initial dummys which I had intentionally seated deep and the empty case, all failed to fully chamber, and the bullets had clearly engraved on the lands. The humber below reflect the amoung of case exposed when chambered and the amount in excess of the empty case.

Empty Case:.......... 0.120 (0.000)
9Cone Dummy #1:. 0.120 (0.000)
9COne Dummy #2:. 0.186 (0.066)
Lead Cone Dummy:. 0.150 (0.030)
Federal FMJ:........... 0.141 (0.021)
Rem GS:................ 0.124 (0.004)​

Having the bullets deeply engraved in the lands is going to raise pressures. and if the gun oi out of battery as well, it is not a good situation. Before I go to the range, I may load up some minimum loads of varying OALs.

Obviously I am going to have to seat deepar when reloading for the R51 than I have been doing for my BHP. And I think the bullet diameter and shape and OAL of factory loads may be critical. In one of the vids, from either RyeonHam or Tactical Existence, he had FOOBs and FRTBs with Cor-Bon and Speer Gold Dots but no problems with Remington FMJ. Somehow, I have the feeling that Remington's new Ultimate Defense will work as well.

Needless to say, I'm not real happy about this.

Also, the vids showed primer bulge/flow issues. High pressures from the bullets engraved in the lands, along with the short blowback of the breech could possibly cause this. Hopefully I'll know more after the range.

 

[JohnnyBravo]

If push comes to shove you could always have a gunsmith cut the throat a little deeper.

JB

 

[JRH6856]

As for problems with pins drifting out, I haven't been able to budge any of the pins with a mallet and punch. On close inspection under magnification, at least one of the holes on the left side of he frame appear to be "toothed". Whatever, it seems to be an efffective way of tightening the fit of the pin.

 

[JRH6856]

If push comes to shove you could always have a gunsmith cut the throat a little deeper.

JB

I've got a set of 9mm chamber reamers so I can do it myself. But not until I'm sure there are no other warranty issues.

 

[shinerjohn]

First Range Trip

I bought my R51 Sunday evening and made it to the range today. I ran 100 rounds of American Eagle 115gr FMJ, 8 rounds of Federal HydraShok 124gr JHP, and 8 rounds of MagTech Guardian Gold 124gr JHP. I was very impressed with the accuracy, the trigger, and noticeable reduced muzzle flip. The recoil is extremely mild and directed straight back into my hand. The magazines seem to be very tight and the 7th round is difficult to load. I did have a few failure to return to battery malfunctions. Overall the R51 seems to be very tight and stiff in movement. I feel confident the R51 will "smooth out" with more use. It is very pleasant to shoot. The sights were easy to pick up and the accuracy was impressive at 8 yards for my first time. I will probably return to the range tomorrow. My expectations for this pistol has not diminished one iota.

 

[JRH6856]

shinerjohn, thanks for the range report. Did you see any evidence of bulging primers, primer flow or bulged cases? Especially with the rounds chambered with the FRTBs? Were the FRTBs with all loads you fired or were they load specific.

Also, did you or could you do a plunk test as I described in Post 358?

 

[shinerjohn]

JRH, I saw no evidence of bulging primers, primer flow, or bulged cases. Out of the 116 rounds, I had 3-4 FRTBs - no FOOBs. The FRTBs were all with Federal American Eagle 115gr FMJ. No plunk test yet.
Of note, as the R51 got dirtier with use, I did NOT experience more difficulties. Right now, the taste in my mouth is that she only needs more work to smooth out the "rough edges." If you have ever owned a Kahr, you should understand what I'm saying. Although the R51 and any Kahr are functionally different, each is very different from any other semi-automatic pistol. They both have their idiosyncrasies. Once you are familiar with the pistol and know what to expect, you will have no further problems. That is my take on the R51.
So we will probably make another trip to the range today!

 

[JRH6856]

Thanks shiner. Mine is smoothing out with hand cycling. I can't get to the range until Monday. I hate it when life gets in the way of fun.

 

[JRH6856]

R51 Dimensions (measured)

Weight w/empty mag; 22.3 OZ.
Weight w/o mag: 20.6 oz.

Length (Diagonal dimension-base of grip to muzzle): 202mm / 7.95"
Length (straigt line Muzzle to base of grip line): 175mm / 6.89
Length (Muzzle to end of slide): 172mm / 6.77"
Height (base of grip to top of sight): 116mm / 4.57"
Mag well width: 15.4mm / 0.606"
Mag well length: 36.9mm / 1.45"
Magazine width: 15.1mm / 0.59
Magazine length: 33.2mm / 1.31"
Grip Height BackStrap: 78.9mm / 3.10"
Grip Height FrontStrap: 63.5mm / 2.50"
Grip Length: 52mm / 2.05"
Grip Width: 25mm / 0.98"
Pull: 75.2mm / 2.96"
Front of Trigger Guard to Muzzle: 45mm / 1.77"
Inside Trigger Guard Height: 23.7mm / 0.93"
Inside Trigger Guard trigger to front: 25.3mm / 0.996"
Barrel (breech face to muzzle 84.6mm / 3.33"
Barrel (case base to muzzle 87.7mm / 3.45"
Sight radius 116.75mm / 4.6"
Sight height (above bore center): 17.78mm / 0.7"

 

[cfullgraf]

I got an R51 yesterday and put 125 rounds through it today.

The only issue I had was the first round from the magazine would not fully go into battery. Just a tap on the slide would get it to go. By the end of the session, the first round would go into battery if I pulled back on the slide to release the slide lock.

No other operational problems. It appears the pistol will have a break in period.

Tonight, I will look at the chamber. It seems to be either rough or tight.

Mine is shooting low and to the left. the later is easily corrected, the former may be a bit more difficult to remedy. Groups are reasonable otherwise.

I feel folks are reading too much into the bulged primers. Mine had a few but no other indications of pressure on the case. There were not even any chamber marks on the case where it is not enclosed by the chamber. i suspect the Pedersen system un-supports the case base before a more conventional action allowing the primer to bulge under the internal pressure.

Update on bulged primers. The bulges in my pistol are the same diameter as the firing pin hole. The primer is flowing back into the firing pin hole. While I have not completely come to grip on how the Pedersen device works, it does move including relative to the hammer. So, the firing pin may not be backed up during the reloading cycle allowing the primer to flow back into the firing pin hole. The firing pin hole is a bit sloppy.

Also, see the next post by shinerjohn.

As an aside, I have a M1911 in 38 Super that has a ding next to the firing pin hole. The primer flows into the ding on firing and shows on the fired case.

Also, the edges of the primer were nicely curved, not flattened as can be case sometimes with high pressures.

All other things being equal such as the bullet not being driven into the lands, if a round is safe in one gun, it should be safe in the R51. Also, it has been shown that primers are not a reliable indication of over pressure.

Remember, cratered primers frequently are due to the firing pin hole being too large.

Bottom line, I am happy so far.

 

[shinerjohn]

2nd range trip

I got a bit frustrated today. I did notice some of my primers were bulging. After a google search, I found where an individual with a model 700 rifle had that problem and contacted Remington. Remington responded that it was not an indication of excessive pressure, but pertained to the breech face. In that instance, they said no harm was being done. I'm not seeing any other signs of elevated pressure, so I'm not going to sweat it unless other problems arise.
Yesterday I disassembled and cleaned the magazines. Those springs are STIFF. I found today that one of the mags would not hold the 7th round until I disassembled and reassembled it. The big problem today was that the last or next to last round would not feed. The bullet was actually sitting outside the ejection port! This happened on every mag of ammo except two times. I decided to come home, break it all down and clean the hell out of it! Then I'll try again.
Every one of the springs are extremely stiff.
Accuracy again was excellent although I really didn't focus on it. The trigger is an excellent SA trigger. IMHO

 

[JRH6856]

The only issue I had was the first round from the magazine would not fully go into battery. Just a tap on the slide would get it to go. By the end of the session, the first round would go into battery if I pulled back on the slide to release the slide lock.

On the first loads that wouldn't chamber iniitally, were you dropping the slide by releasing the slide lock or pulling the slide back?

Tonight, I will look at the chamber. It seems to be either rough or tight.

I've seen a few reports of rough or uneven chambers, including one of a case separation leaving the front half of the case in the chamber.

All other things being equal such as the bullet not being driven into the lands, if a round is safe in one gun, it should be safe in the R51. Also, it has been shown that primers are not a reliable indication of over pressure.

I'm not so concerned with bulged primers. I think that is just something that is likely to happen with a Pedersen block that is really just floating there until it its driven back and locked by the recoiling case.

Bulged cases are another matter. I've been plunk testing all my relaods which were loaded for my BHP. None of them come close to chambering in the R51 and would certainly produce an out of battery condigtion with the bullets deeply engraved on the lands.

 

[shinerjohn]

JRH, none of my cases were bulged in the least bit.
I just broke down both magazines. I had both of them assembled incorrectly! That certainly explains the problems I had today! Ugh!

 

[cfullgraf]

My comments are in red.

On the first loads that wouldn't chamber iniitally, were you dropping the slide by releasing the slide lock or pulling the slide back?

Both. At first I just released the slide lock, then after the slide would not go into battery, I began pulling back on the side and released it. By the end of my shooting session, pulling back on the slide and releasing would send the first round home into battery.

I've seen a few reports of rough or uneven chambers, including one of a case separation leaving the front half of the case in the chamber.

My chamber looks uniform and reasonably polished/smoothed. My reloads seem to be a little tighter in the chamber than some new factory rounds. I only shot reloads today so I do not know if the new ammunition would have gone into battery from the get go. No hard and fast measurement, just "touchy/feely" inspections.

I'm not so concerned with bulged primers. I think that is just something that is likely to happen with a Pedersen block that is really just floating there until it its driven back and locked by the recoiling case.

Bulged cases are another matter. I've been plunk testing all my relaods which were loaded for my BHP. None of them come close to chambering in the R51 and would certainly produce an out of battery condigtion with the bullets deeply engraved on the lands.

As I said before, I did not experience any bulged cases. At first, I made sure the slide was in battery and as time went on, I only checked slide on the first round.

While jamming the bullet into the lands will certainly raise pressure, if the gun is fired out of battery, the case bulges will also occur. In my pistol, the slide only missed being out of battery by a 1/16" or so. Since I was watching for it, I never pulled the trigger on an out of battery condition.

Also, I was shooting 115 FMJRN bullets which would go deeper into the barrel before contacting the lands as oppose to a truncated cone or something similar. I do not know what bullets your are using but it seems 9mm FMJRN are out of favor these days with most folks.

Hope this helps.

 

[barnbwt]

"i suspect the Pedersen system un-supports the case base before a more conventional action allowing the primer to bulge under the internal pressure."

That may be, but it's not supposed to. What I think may be happening is that rough (or unfluted) chambers are preventing the case head from sliding back to launch the breech block as intended, leaving us with a sort of primer-actuated Pedersen system (cool concept, but will scare people unless you design it to re-seat the primer before ejection). In such a case, the whole primer would be domed outward or slid out of the pocket slightly; if it's just the imprint of the FP hole bulging, that sounds like a poor firing pin/hole design (likely due to a too-light firing pin, too sharp a firing pin, too large a FP, or sloppy FP opening in the bolt face). It is also possible that a slide hung up on the disconnector at the last moment --still my suspicion for a number of these issues-- wouldn't quite snap the extractor over the rim, leaving a small gap between breechface and case head.

I would suggest someone (just for funsies) try greasing or oiling a few rounds and see if the issue ameliorates, as that would indicate chamber friction is the culprit, which may or may not actually mean the chamber quality is the issue; it's entirely possible the much higher pressures of the 9mm require chamber fluting for best effect here, especially considering how small the blowback mass resisting the bolt thrust is. Ockham's Razor suggests the culprit is really just chambers being undersized and rough due to poor tooling, though . For the reasons already stated, the R51 would inherently be less tolerant of poor chamber cutting (well, the primers would be, at least)

As far as mag springs being stiff, does anyone know what the cyclic speed of the action is? I am curious if weaker springs may have had bolt-override issues due to the light slide ricocheting back and forth at light speed.

TCB

 

[shinerjohn]

One more thing: the primers bulged on the Federal ammo (I assume using Federal primers). They did not bulge on the Magtech Guardian Gold ammo. I don't have any ammo with Remington, Winchester, or CCI primers.

 

[JRH6856]

shiner: OK, Federals are thin so if any are going to bulge, those would logically be the ones. I've got 3 boxes of Federal American Eagle, and I'll spend the weekend loading 2-300 MBC 9Cones with Winchester primers.

Also, I was shooting 115 FMJRN bullets which would go deeper into the barrel before contacting the lands as oppose to a truncated cone or something similar. I do not know what bullets your are using but it seems 9mm FMJRN are out of favor these days with most folks.

On the plunk test, the three boxes of Federal AE FMJRN 115g all hit the lands before fully chambering. I can press them in with finger pressure but then have to tap them out. The 9Cones have to be fully seated in the case to the beginning of the taper. Otheriwise, they hit the lands. 147g Golden Sabres and 115g Win Silvertip chamber OK.

That may be, but it's not supposed to. What I think may be happening is that rough (or unfluted) chambers are preventing the case head from sliding back to launch the breech block as intended, leaving us with a sort of primer-actuated Pedersen system (cool concept, but will scare people unless you design it to re-seat the primer before ejection). In such a case, the whole primer would be domed outward or slid out of the pocket slightly; if it's just the imprint of the FP hole bulging, that sounds like a poor firing pin/hole design

That makes sense. Most of what I've seen online is domed primers or unseated primers AND a firing pin hole bulge. In at least one case, the case separated leaving the front half in the chamber. If I see any of this at the range, I'll try lubing the cases and then I'll do a little chamber polishing.

 

[cfullgraf]

FYI, the C.O.L. of my 9x19 reloads is 1.135" with 115 FMJRN.

Some Remington 115 FMJRN factory ammunition, the C.O.L. is 1.105".