Nick Leghorn took to the web again today, to say only "See, I was right" it seems...
I like his gun rights articles, but he's out of his depth in reviewing guns that aren't objectively perfect (which is why his review was mostly subjective stuff, BS speculation, and mysterious slide bite and trigger issues that ail few others). I also notice that few, if any, of his criticisms --even the legitimate ones-- come up in the video. Hardly 'confirmation' or 'validation'
I suggest folks who understand guns watch the MAC review Nick cites (which btw, cites Nick as well
) and have a notepad ready. Many issues with the review's subject matter. Stuff like the original Model 51 having a gritty slide (bull) to the R51 being far worse, to the (same) R51 being "smooth" and easily racked with his index finger later in the video. Oh, he brought up the loose rear sight again, even though he was not reviewing that gun. I'm pretty sure it's the only 'serious problem' he was able to diagnose. Other than that, it was a lot of "I'm not sure's" and "I don't know about this's." Even with the bound-slide R51 he burned initially and the smooth-racking T&E guy in his hands, he couldn't be bothered to compare them side by side and show the difference. Oh, and he was terrified and shaking like a leaf the whole shooting session. So frightened of the gun exploding he forgot to wear gloves. I think Nick Leghorn is the only guy who has lost a drop of blood to the gun, so far (if that unique/mysterious slide-bite redness managed to break the skin)
The Coop-Di-Greasie was toward the end when he states the Model 51 was a well built and very good gun, but that the
Pedersen action is the problem with the R51, and that Remington
should have gone with a Browning design instead when they revived it*. --As if that was even an option! Totally ignorant and dismissive of how firearms operate or how products are designed. The firearm "action"
is the firearm. That's like trying to replace the unripe tomato in your sandwich with an Orangutan; they're both orange, but that's about it, and one isn't shaped like the other. I am a design engineer, which is why this one really irked me. If someone asked me offhand to "just replace the plane's two props with a single turbofan" because the thrust is the same and the efficiency is higher, I'd throttle them (unless it came with an insane budget to work with
)
But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, nor too judgmental. The more I learn and delve into this stuff (I'm not usually super-enamored with Youtube reviewers, since so many are obnoxious, but I've been obsessed with learning about this gun) the more I realize sites like MAC and TTAG are aimed at Motor Trend audiences; they are used to having perfect products to review with zero legitimate (i.e. mechanical) complaints, and pad out the article with platitudes and subjective criticism for an audience with little technical background. IIRC, Motor Trend (or the CVS equivalent) recently reviewed the Tesla or another all-electric car, and had it die on the launch pad during testing. But instead of speculating about whether the battery's charging voltage control was to blame, thus making the car a dangerous death trap --they sent the thing back, stated the car had an issue that rendered it inoperable, and said they could not recommend the vehicle. Which is all a buyer really needs to know.
Taking the car analogy a bit further, 'cams' are extremely important parts in a car with extremely high production quality. When surfaces roll or scrape across each other under heavy load, there is very little margin for error. But, there is also the potential for incredibly efficient transfer of force and energy when done properly. This is both why the R51 is a brilliant concept with great potential, and why Remington will continue to lose fans so long as they scrimp on the machine work, at least in the most critical areas.
One last note; I hate to sound like a jerk, but TTAG/MAC/Tactical Existence all seem to be referencing each other's reviews,
explicity, and all have been firmly set against the pistol from the beginning. Between the early baseless comments, the heavily biased initial reviews, close interaction, and now bold claims
the gun is unsafe, despite no actual incidents of unsafe operation in their experience...they just may end up with some collusion/libel issues if they aren't saavy. Random dudes on the internet like me praising/bashing? Who cares. But these guys have had a very demonstrable impact on initial and future R51 sales. I'm not defending Remington's nor Para's incompetence (though the reviewers haven't once mentioned Para), just sayin' the nail(s) that stick up get hammered down when they poke the feet of the big man.
TCB
*I'm pretty sure RIA's, which have been reputed to be the 'poorest' production 1911 these days and have some issues, are made to vastly better standard of machining than the Remington so far, which is more in the league of Century's MAS 49/56 rechambering, and CETME reassembly
), but it does not appear anywhere capable of impeding function (anymore). Mag remains stiff and gritty, but it hasn't been worked near as much as the slide.
