Remington R51 rumor mill

Discussion in 'General Firearms Discussion' started by lklawson, Jan 21, 2016.

  1. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    OK, label this as "gossip" and ingest as much NaCl as required.

    A member on a forum dedicated to the R51 reported on Jan 9, 2016 that Remington told him that they had run 50 production-line firearms and they are in QC for testing now with no reported flaws as of yet. Expected rollout was reported to be Q1 2016.

    I'll buy one. Hopefully, the besmirched R51 reputation will allow me to pick it up for well under MSRP. :)

    Peace favor your sword,
  2. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    Worst that could happen, is that you get another 1911......

  3. SWAGA

    SWAGA No longer broke... Lifetime Supporter

    It's a good looking gun though....

  4. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    I think so..... Looks like a excellent cc piece to me....
  5. SWAGA

    SWAGA No longer broke... Lifetime Supporter

    Bull agrees with me.....

    * pounding head on the wall *
  6. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    You got good taste in guns....... Some savants are good at math, some piano or violin..... Your "special" skill just happens to be seeing the beauty of guns....
  7. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    I was unaware of the gun let alone the problems. But 20 minutes on Google and I have to ask why would anyone buy that gun? Couple that with the Marlin lever gun problems, and the other bad Remington publicity recently, why would anyone buy any Remington right now. I've been supportive because my two Remlins do work and I love them both, but I can see what everyone is botching about in both guns.

    Kirk it only looks like a laser. From what I'm seeing I'm not even sure it's a firearm. Lol
  8. Hansj3

    Hansj3 Supporting Member

    Yeah, it looks like a early 1900s colt. Or an eastern European cold war relic. What's the benefits of it?
  9. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    It's a tad longer than some of the competition but was the most comfortable shooting 9mm of it's size I've ever pressed the trigger on.

    Peace favor your sword,
  10. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    The Gen 1 (as it's being popularly called) was epic in the coalescence of problems.

    Ignore most of what you read. The vast majority of it is over-the-top hysteria and pile-on "Me Too" from wannabe "Gun Blogger Experts" in the Blogosphere and on Youtube where very few, imo, are actually experts and even fewer are capable of giving an intelligent and coherent "review." Many of the Gen 1 guns did, in fact, have problems. Most of the problems did not deserve the wide-eyed horror and hyper-criticism which they received. What I witnessed was the equivalent of a feeding frenzy by a pack of rabid zombie squirrels.

    I think that part of it was that the gun was received with much hype and very high expectations; far higher than what should reasonable have been extended to an initial offering of a brand new design. It seems like there is almost no new gun that can be offered on the market which won't have at least one "recall" or "parts recall," particularly if that design is new to the manufacturer. For instance the Ruger LC9 had a safety recall because of a very serious design issue which could lead to unintentional discharges in some circumstances. But was Ruger pilloried by the Blogosophere for it?

    As I've written many times, when I bought the R51 I knew ahead of time that it was a brand new design and a first offering from a company who hadn't made any handguns (besides recently rerolling the 1911) in something like a century. That coupled with it's very unique operating concept told me that there was a decent possibility that there were going to be "bugs" to be worked out. Like when car companies started releasing the first gen of hybrids.

    I saw one guy get completely incensed with Remington because the R51 was the very first, and his only, handgun he'd bought and it was specifically for SD and CC. My response was, "well that was dumb." Why on earth would you buy as your only CC gun an unproven first generation model of a unique design from a company who hadn't made handguns in a hundred years? Duh.

    Well, for me, honestly, because it's neat and I like unique designs. That said, a good reason(s) is because everything Remington claimed about the gun was absolutely 100% spot on in the gun I shot. The ergonomics were phenomenal. It was a very natural pointer. The sights really were every bit as "snag free" but large and visible as Remington claimed. The "racking force" of the slide really was exceptionally light. The weight and shape of the gun really did make it comfortable to CC (I CC'ed it, unloaded, around the house for a weekend). The trigger really was pretty decent, as they claimed. And, most amazingly to me, when Remington claimed low "felt recoil," despite the light weight of the aluminum frame, they weren't exaggerating one iota. It was the most comfortable shooting and easy recoiling handgun of that size I've ever shot with a "felt recoil" consistent with a full sized, all steel, service handgun instead of a diminutive "compact" sized CC handgun. There was no discernible difference in shooting "feel" between the American Eagle brand FMJ range fodder and the Hornady Critical Duty +P which I shot.

    IF Remington can get the bugs worked out of this design (and I believe they probably can, given time), it will be an exceptional choice for CC.

    The gun I had did have at least three problems. First, and most obvious to me, after a couple of mags it began to suffer mag drops with every round. Clearly something popped loose or broke internally. I might have been able to kitchen-table it but with a brand new, in warranty gun I wasn't going to. Second, when I examined the spent brass, I found clear evidence of a very rough and unpolished chamber as was shown by the consistent scuffing of the top half of the brass. Third, I found clear evidence of pressure issues in both standard pressure range fodder and in the +P SD loads (which the gun is rated for). The primers were "flowing" around the primer strike location, making what some described as "a pimple with a dimple" in the primer. Looks a little like an impact crater with crater walls rising above the surface level of the surrounding landscape. While I can't say for my gun (because I'd already sent it back before I thought to check for it), the most likely reason, I believe, for the primer flow was that there was no (or too little) Lead between the start of the Rifling and the Chamber Shoulder. Other owners did a Plunk Test with standard FMJ and found the bullet engaging rifling immediately upon being chambered. Interestingly, they claimed that this didn't happen with Remington brand ammunition.

    In my example, the rough chamber could be polished and the issue with the Lead could be solved by custom tailoring ammo, using only Remington brand, having a gunsmith increase the Lead, or by simply replacing the blasted barrel with one made right to start with. :)

    The vast majority and the loudest of the "botching" is coming from people who never shot, or even handled, one. It's a lot like Hi Point haters blathering on about how much crap that POS Hi Point gun is without ever touching one.

    I believe that the odds that Remington will have worked out the bugs in the Gen 2 version are pretty good. But I have at least 10 or 12 other handguns which are CC capable. Buying a Gen 2 R51 (if they ever actually release it) will be very little risk for me. If it works right it will likely become my favorite CC. If it doesn't, if the Gen 2 is as epicly cursed as the Gen 1, then Remington will do the same thing as before. When the feeding frenzy with the Gen 1 was at it's apex, as a way of doing damage control (I believe), Remington began offering full purchase price refunds to customers or a straight up one-for-one swap for a 1911R1, which carries nearly a $400 higher MSRP, iirc. I eventually accepted the swap and "traded up" my money something like 70-100% in value (roughly).

    But, quite honestly, there's no way that Remington can release the Gen 2 if it's not 100% ready. The took a bath over Gen 1, both in the press and financially, Remington can not release a bad Gen 2.

    Peace favor your sword,
  11. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    It's based on an early competitor to the Colt Vest Pocket. At the time, Colt still had the patent on Browning's lockup system so Remington used a lockup system designed by Pedderson.

    Comfortable carry, natural pointing, good sights, good trigger, light slide racking weight, and the lowest felt recoil of any gun in its size range.

    ...if the can get the bugs worked out. :)

    Peace favor your sword,
  12. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    I dig your points, but this sounds like more that Internet pile on. The gun really is dorked. And it's been what over a year? It's a gun, it's not rocket science, I assume they have real engineers. They come up with fixes for airplanes in less time, lots less time. That tells me, a guy who knows nothing about the gun, something isn't right.

    Oh and I don't buy a first year new model car either. Nor will I get on a 787 for a while longer. Lol
  13. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    I don't know how much impact it had but I do know that right in the middle of the giant clusterf, Remington moved their production facilities from Ilion, N.Y. to Huntsville. Supposedly, Remington had made enough stock of the R51 to cover the time that they'd require to spin up the new plant. But if the old stock all has to get scrapped, that puts them behind schedule again.

    There was also rumor that the original R51's weren't made at the NY plant but were, instead, "internally subcontracted" to Para Ordinance, ims. Apparently, so the rumor mill has it, prior to being acquired, Para was suffering severe QC problems.

    Some speculation had it that Para screwed the QC on the R51 with "tolerance stacking" issues and then production got stopped because of the Huntsville move.

    Again, to be clear, I don't know if it's true or not, or (if true) how much actual effect it should have had, but if it was subbed to Para and their QC caused tolerance stacking and then Remington transferred to Huntsville while trying to "fix" the R51, that, in my estimation, would certainly classify as a Perfect Storm of Craptastic Luck and Questionable Decisions. :)

    But, like I said, I'm in the not-so-unique position of having several CC capable handguns so I can "afford" (so to speak) to take a chance.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2016
  14. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    Well if that's true I can see how that could gum things up. It's still Remington screwing up guns, something they are supposed to be really good at. I should say screwing up guns again, because the deal with the lever guns was real too. They were forced to shut down production of those for 4 or 5 months. But I did get a good one, and I don't think the problems were as bad as the ether net said. But I don't know for sure.
  15. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    Oh I should add to be fair. I knew of the lever gun problems and bought one anyway. Hehe
  16. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    <nods> I don't disagree at all.

    I'm just in the not-entirely-unique position of
    1. Realizing that a Gen 1, new production, new design gun could have "issues" and so I adjusted my expectations to be in line with that
    2. Have a bunch of other guns that work for CC so I'm not depending on the R51
    3. Was treated really well by Remington by giving me a several hundred dollar "upgrade" (which has, thus far, been rock solid)

    Honestly, my biggest complaint with Remington thus far has been the absolutely abysmally atrocious lack of communication and transparency with their customers.

    Peace favor your sword,
  17. bscar

    bscar Supporting Member

    I wonder if it could have been disgruntled employees losing their job.

    I'll probably buy myself an r51 if they come back out
  18. It's a classic design that deserves better than the poor re-introduction it had and there's a market for it, if the quality is there.
  19. duster066

    duster066 Supporting Member

    What's different about it? How do they get the recoil down?
  20. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Besides the all-metal frame, which really isn't that heavy, the two most important parts are the Pedderson "Hesitation Lock" and the fact that the Hesitation Lock allows the barrel to act as the recoil guide and recoil spring "rod" which lowers the bore height significantly.

    The ergonomics of the grip are also excellent which helps to hide some of the felt recoil.

    Peace favor your sword,