Return of the Remington R51

[MikeJackmin]

A user on another forum offers some interesting comments after his discussion with Remington:

The ejector pin is the factory pin and is not supposed to extend from wall to wall. The disconnector is not supposed to operate on this pin. The purpose for it is only to retain the ejector, not to interact with the disconnector.

The corrections Remington made on the Gen 2 were not due to anything related to the frames, thus the frames already in stock will be used first and the newly stamped frames from the Huntsville, Alabama plant will come out later this year

http://www.remingtonowners.com/post16198.html

 

[barnbwt]

Wow, sounds like good ol' Mr. Right Hand isn't keeping his counterpart in the loop again, or Remington is just lying to their customers (still)

TCB

 

[agtman]

Wow, sounds like good ol' Mr. Right Hand isn't keeping his counterpart in the loop again, or Remington is just lying to their customers (still).

Known to happen when you're peddling junk.

 

[RecoilRob]

The ejection failures in RoH's video were likely from the Tula 115's not having enough oomph to fully drive back the slide. If you watch it...the ones that did eject aren't coming out with any velocity at all. Add in his meaty paw dragging on the slide (ala Walther PPK) and it's understandable the ejection was a bit spotty.

Owners would be ahead if they tried the different bullet weights as some little guns that are unreliable with 115's or lighter will run 124's and 147's especially well. I can't blame the manufacturer for making the guns this way because if you tailored everything inside to run perfectly with the very lightest bullets then when someone insisted on running the heavies that make more momentum there's a good chance of the gun getting battered.

I like how they say the bolt deformations aren't 'galling'. In the comments on RoH's video we talked about what that stuff was...and thought that 'galling' might not be the right word as it looks like plastic deformation or displacement of the metal. Whatever the surface coating being used might be..it doesn't seem to have a problem allowing the metal underneath to get all dented up. Wouldn't be so bad if it was a single mark that could be smoothed once the burr built up...but his looks like dozens of impacts across a wide area of the ramp. Maybe the slide surface that butts that is too sharp...or the bolt is just too darned soft. Wouldn't it be great if the slide MUST indent the bolt as part of the timing retardation for the gun to work right! If those surfaces would be smoothed and made hard enough that no deformation would occur...where is the energy that is being used to dent the bolt going to go?

After all this time...I thought they had worked out these problems! What little confidence Remington might have still enjoyed is seemingly less and less with every report on this re-released gun. Sad..

 

[JRH6856]

IMO, the operation is being managed by beancounters not engineers. Several different suggestions as to how to address a problem hit the product manager's desk and he doesn't have the tech knowledge to realize that some of them are conflicting. So he picks the two or three that cost the least to implement because that is the most important criteria to a beancounter.

The only changes I can see are:

*Redesigned the disconnector
*Redesigned the ejector
*Plated the bolt
*Hardened the frame lug
*Changed the trigger material to plastic
*Installed a stiffer recoil spring
*Redesigned the magazine follower
*Redesigned the magazine floorplate
*Repositioned the model logo on the slide.
*MAY have finish reamed the chamber.

Whatever improvements may have been made to improve the slide action and reduce the short cycling may have been compromised to an extent by the stiffer recoil spring.

 

[barnbwt]

I like how they say the bolt deformations aren't 'galling'. In the comments on RoH's video we talked about what that stuff was...and thought that 'galling' might not be the right word as it looks like plastic deformation or displacement of the metal. Whatever the surface coating being used might be..it doesn't seem to have a problem allowing the metal underneath to get all dented up. Wouldn't be so bad if it was a single mark that could be smoothed once the burr built up...but his looks like dozens of impacts across a wide area of the ramp. Maybe the slide surface that butts that is too sharp...or the bolt is just too darned soft.

Definitely this; I took a diamond file (nothing else would even touch that nitrided SOB) to the corners of the slide cams, just a touch to knock off the sharp edge (yes, sharp as in barely deburred from what I could tell), and my gun stopped scraping metal off the bolt cams. Bolt is softer than it should be, but with a soft edge & grease, it's plenty tough for this level of abuse.

*Redesigned the disconnector
*Redesigned the ejector

Both of these "involved" the frame, Remington, especially the disconnector. The frames required actual rework, for Pete's sake. I agree with JRH that the news of the frames' salvage is indicative of a cut corner.

Remington; you're supposed to implement Six Sigma before forcing everyone into "Lean" operation

*Hardened the frame lug

Yeah, this is total BS; I don't see how it could not be. I mean, the frames are the same, so it's not like they went from 6061 to 7075, or 7075 to 7475; metallurgical changes that could actually have a potential impact on bearing strength or wear. It's also not like the anodizing could possibly be hugely different, and even if they have gone from Type I to Type II (which would itself be a sign of incredibly cheap production initially) it's just a slightly thicker layer of the same material, which clearly is more than worn away after the first few times the bolt slips over the locking surface. I am surprised Remington bothered to pretend to address it, though; I never saw any evidence the aluminum lug was being significantly damaged by peening, just wear tracks from the peened edges where the bolt slams into the disconnector ears.

TCB

 

[JRH6856]

As to why they pretended to address the frame lug, It does look like there is thicker coat of something on it that wasn't on my Gen1. Whether it is effective or not, it is something they can point to and say they did. Good for marketing. The more bullet points they can put in a list, the more subjectively positive the reaction of the target audience, regardless of the importance or effective usefulness.

 

[Gun Master]

Thank you Remington for the R1!

Next !

 

[haiauphixu]

How to get the FFL fee reimbursement?
Did any R51 owner get the reimbursement for the FFL fee? If so, is there a form to fill out or a phone number to call?
I got my R51 back 2 days ago, tested fire yesterday with 100 rds of WWB and 100 rds of Federal; 2 FTE, other than that the gun shoot normal, not any better than before, nothing exceptional to brag about.
The front sight is visible off to the left of the slide, I have to aim way out to the left edge of the target to get the POI to the bull eye area. No big deal, I can fix that, but it telling you how careless Remington is.
I will take it out to the range a couple more times after adjustment for test fire then put it back to the farthest corner of the safe then move on to something else.
No more Remington.

 

[seeker_two]

Thank you Remington for the R1 Pelican case!

Next !

Fixed it for you!

 

[Badger Arms]

Sorry to be late to the game, but I thought I'd add a few comments on my video (my YouTube handle is RyeOnHam for those wondering):

1) FAT HANDS! - yes, the web of my thumb is fat and does ride up on the gun... but this is not uncommon. I find the following guns troublesome: the M1911 with GI grip safeties, Walther PPK, SIG P232, and pretty much any .25 ACP pocket pistol. That said, I do not have problems with most slides and, no, the slide was not contacting my hand for all but one or two shots that I did with the POV behind the camera.

2) Pivot Pin - a remington representative Michael Snyder, the lead engineer on the R51 redesign, stated, "There's a small pin that's located near the very rear of the frame. There's two holes that go all the way through the frame. There's a pin in there that's NOT ACTUALLY INTENDED FOR THE DISCONNECTOR AT ALL." He is asked why there is a hole in the disconnector and says, "When we build these on the production line, we actually put the ejector in after the disconnector, so we have to have that hole there so we can put it together." So, Remington says it's an ejector pin. Begs the question, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE PIN SLIPS OVER and HOLDS THE DISCONNECTOR TOO? Nobody seems to be able to answer that question. When assembled, the disconnector cannot be held on the right side, but can be held on the left side by that pin. My pin was loose enough to fall out of the gun.

3) Ammo - yes, I used BrassMaxx ammo for most of the range session. For those who complain, my Glock's never fail with this, neither do my S&W's, my Colt Carbine, My Kel Tec carbine, etc. To say that you have to use premium ammo with the gun is a not to the overall reliability.

4) Break-in - there was a figure of 5,000 round operating life floating around at one point. I am not going to shoot 500 or 1,000 rounds breaking a gun in when that means 10-20% of the service life.

5) How I held the gun - Funny, this could hold some merit. When I fired the gun one-handed (be it left or right), it seemed to operate better. With both hands, it was more difficult. I did find that the grip safety with my man-hands was MUCH more difficult to operate. I am 6'3" and over 300 pounds these days, so you can SAY what you want about my fat hands, but the small size of the grip made it difficult to hold the gun so that the strong-spring on the grip safety wasn't trying to disengage. You'll note that above I didn't talk about how wonderful my Springfield Armory XD9 operated with BrassMaxx. I cannot reliably keep the grip safety of the XD9 or stock 1911 depressed either. This is more anatomical, but I am CERTAIN I am not the only one with this problem.

6) MIM and internals - the safety is a sliding block inside the frame that moves up and down when you grip the gun. This part has two slots that ride on two loose pins in the grip, under the grip panels. This part had MIM flashing on it that was REALLY rough. I was able to polish out the slots and reduce the grip safety tension by about 20-30% I'd guess, but it also made it much smoother. Warning: do not do this unless you have three hands and a good deal of experience with detail-stripping guns. The fact that these parts are MIM is not so bad, but the flashing on the safety was inexcusable.

7) Real Men - real men have callouses built up on the web of their thumb to deal with recoil, yes, but then I only shoot about 1,000 a month of centerfire pistol, and most of that recently has been my Gen 4 Glock 19. That said, this gun hurt the webbing of my thumb not because of my weakness, but because of the sharp edges on the frame. barnbwt commented that he didn't know what I was talking about and that there was a .030" radius on his, but this was absolutely NOT the case with my bun. Mine was razor sharp and at a right angle. I have since radiused that a bit, but now it is bare finish there. Again, just because it isn't a problem for people who drive fence-posts 16 hours a day does not mean it isn't a problem.

8) Trigger Reset - funny thing is that the trigger does not have a bit of a reset. The reason it did not initially was that the disconnector was sticky moving up and down in its recess. It is somewhat less sticky now that I polished the safety, but the trigger reset is still not positive. Why is this an issue? For single fire, I have to take my finger completely off the trigger to ensure it resets. Putting it back on, the side-to-side play means that each pull is different and the trigger is at a different place on my finger each time. It just feels mushy and unstable. I have owned and do own a fair number of pistols and this is absurd.

 

[barnbwt]

How I held the gun - Funny, this could hold some merit.

Check out Gunblast's re-review (rave reviews again, btw ). Towards the end, there is a slow-mo of him doing rapid fires, and the recoil response on the first shot seems consistently more violent (pitches up & back more) than subsequent shots.

So your safety spring is...strong? I don't have a pull guage on mine, but it's more than a 1911 safety & far more positive, but maybe only like six pounds or so (similar to a decent trigger weight, but obviously not a clean break or anything). I recall the the first batch of guns had a number of users who could either not disengage the safety, or found it extremely difficult, because of crappy tolerances at the camming surface between the safety block and the lever. If a lot of attention/force is required for you to depress the safety or keep it down, I can see that screwing with your hold on the gun in a number of ways.

The pain & discomfort at the grip is strange to me because my R51 is literally the most comfortable gripped firearm I own, except perhaps the much-smaller SACM 1935A or much-wider Hi Power. No sharp corners, no sharp edges, no way my hand is getting near the slide, no callouses required . I have to conclude it's just a hand-size thing or something.

Is your safety going below flush such that the frame opening's edges are exposed, or something? That I could see being an issue. Or is it the upper surface of your hand digging into the channel on the underside of the tail where the top of the lever slides? I think I may just grip guns a bit lower having never bothered with Glocks much, but I know that a super-high grip is preferred these days (the R51 bore axis is so low that a lower grip isn't met with near as much muzzle flip). At any rate, my hand isn't mashed way up into the underside of the frame tail much.

the trigger reset is still not positive

Did the originals *click* when the trigger is released (I recall you had one)? Because the mechanism at the sear is the same from what I can tell, and didn't look to me like it'd be capable of having a reset *click* unless you intentionally added a feature to do so (hurting trigger pull quality in the process). Once the trigger disconnects (which occurs both by the slide cycling and by drawing the trigger fully to the rear) the sears (primary and trigger safety) freely fall back into the hammer notches when it rotates back (this causes the *click* in a 1911), and the trigger bar will not fall back into the sear recesses where it can move them again until the trigger is released. Because the trigger pivots, and the trigger bar is free to pivot at the trigger connection, and the tail of the trigger bar is free to move as it engages the sear notches, there doesn't seem to be any way you'd ever have a *click* upon reset. If you pull a weight off the edge of a shallow raised surface onto a lower one, there is no discernible change in the rope's tension; it's the same here with the R51 trigger arrangement as far as tactile feedback . Now, if you made the transition between those surfaces steep/sharp, and added a spring to forcefully drive the trigger bar into the sear notches as it was released, you would probably get a *click* like the 1911. But the R51 doesn't have a disconnector that *clicks* as it operates, since it isn't sliding off the edge of anything under spring tension; it just has a tail of the trigger bar slide back over the sear lever tails along an incline under the mild force of the disconnector spring.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

That vertically moving part (disconnector) as the trigger resets is what causes the sound/feel in a 1911. That same sliding motion of the trigger bar tail in the R51 is isolated from the trigger by two pivots, and acts perpindicular to the trigger bar (so nothing gets transmitted back to the shooter's finger). If you take the slide off the R51, you can actually hear the trigger bar slide back in front of the sear tails, but it's a very quiet "thud" rather than *click* since there is less spring tension, and it isn't falling abruptly off a sharp surface onto another (it's really sliding down into a little pocket in the space of .01" or so). It's possible that changing the shape of the sear tails so the bar actually gets some "air time" before coming to rest would result in a satisfying click, but I'll bet you still won't feel it at the trigger.

What's sad is that I'll bet a disconnector design identical to the 1911 could be worked into the R51. They actually operate somewhat similarly, only the trigger bar functionally pinned to the disconnector in a sliding slot. The R51 wraps around all the other trigger parts, instead of poking through them like the 1911. An even simpler solution would be to have a finger of metal attached to the trigger bar that extends up high enough along the sides of the magazine where the slide rails will strike it & drive the trigger bar downward --which is all the disconnector is doing. Remington would just need to mill two shallow grooves inside the magazine well, and make a proper trigger bar that isn't a Happy Meal toy like the current one (i.e. make its arms 1/4" wide like the 1911's )

Also, looking into the hammer follow issue described, it looks like if the safety-block tension shifts upward when the safety is released, the tail of the primary sear (the one that fires the gun) gets trapped on the backside of the safety arms, so cocking the hammer with the safety released will result in it falling on the "half cock" position trigger safety sear. Conversely, there is a second issue where if a properly cocked gun has the trigger pulled enough to remove the trigger safety (the first stage) and the safety released, the trigger safety sear-tail gets trapped behind the safety block's other arm, and that safety element will not re-engage its hammer notch until safety block is dropped by clicking the grip again.

I still believe that some basic coordination would alleviate these issues, but it is bothersome that the sear tails' design has them move so much that they can get trapped on the far side of the safety block arms & locked into position on the wrong side (the deactivated side). Shorter tails would not have this issue (and would have sufficient leverage to drive down the safety block on their own rather than rely on a user's grip) but smaller motions must be more precise motions --a no-go for Remington's execution

Those little silver raised surfaces are the 'arms' on the safety block. When raised, they keep the sear or safety lever tails from moving to the rear and releasing the hamer; but they move far enough when the safety is down that they get trapped on top of those safety arms, and they are not rounded or sloped enough for the sear/safety lever tails to slide back down and re-engage the hammer notches.

Pretty lame and a symptom of poor product testing (or low standards), but it is at least a pretty odd and unlikely occurrence given how the gun is meant to be used (cocked with a firm grip that depresses the safety, trigger only touched while safety is depressed with a firm grip). If you try to operate that safety independent of holding the gun to do anything with it (i.e. treat it like a manually-selectable safety) I can see where you might run into issues.

TCB

 

[Coal Dragger]

Yeah, I'll be avoiding this pistol like the plague.

My brother has a little Walther PPS that only needed a set of Trijicon HD's and some grip tape from Talon Grips. Runs everything we've put through it, and shoots pretty well for a sub compact auto. Price isn't bad either if a guy looks around.

Why would anyone buy this Remington at this point?