New Remington R51

[Shooter III]

*** I realize this post is not about Ruger Center Fire Pistols ***
NOTE: This post was meant to be what I call "Bench Racing" that's where you and the guys sit around the workbench in the garage drinking a few beers and talking crap about how fast your 69 Camero is. Just bench racing guys !

I am chomping at the bit waiting for this sub-compact to come out in the .40 S&W, I'm thinking my Bersa .380 just might be put out to pasture ! R51 MSRP $389.00

>>> http://gunblast.com/Remington-R51.htm <<<

AND ...

>>> http://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2014/01/remington-r51-9mm-gun-review8/ <<<

 

[drfarth]

I'll wait for them to work out any bugs that I'm sure will crop up in the first batch. Very interesting handgun, though, and the street price is expected to be at that magic sub-$400 price point.

 

[Mike J]

I'll wait for them to work out any bugs that I'm sure will crop up in the first batch. Very interesting handgun, though, and the street price is expected to be at that magic sub-$400 price point.

I agree this looks like a very interesting design. I kinda want one but I'm not in any hurry to be a beta tester either. I'll watch to see what the reviews are like in a year after these have been out in circulation for a while.

 

[22/45 Fan]

Have you ever fired a .40 S&W in a small, lightweight pistol? It's not fun.

 

[Shooter III]

Have you ever fired a .40 S&W in a small, lightweight pistol? It's not fun.

Sort of ... And let me ask you this >> DID YOU READ how the pistol is designed to handle muzzle flip and recoil ? If not take a look at this >>> http://therock.remington.com/firearm_ModelR51.php#.UwaHroXVGCg <<<

I have shot my friends PX4Storm sub-compact in a .40 S&W and it was not hard to handle, some of the worst handguns I've shot are the little pocket pistols in a .380, the R51 is not a pocket pistol, but a sub-compact. Anyway ... My son is a Range Officer at my local gun range, as soon as they get a few I'll be able to run a few rounds through one and see if I like it before I plunk down my $$$.

NOTE: This post was meant to be what I call "Bench Racing" that's where you and the guys sit around the workbench in the garage drinking a few beers and talking crap about how fast your 69 Camero is. Just bench racing !

 

[revhigh]

Have you ever fired a .40 S&W in a small, lightweight pistol? It's not fun.

Sort of ... And let me ask you this >> DID YOU READ how the pistol is designed to handle muzzle flip and recoil ? If not take a look at this >>> http://therock.remington.com/firearm_ModelR51.php#.UwaHroXVGCg <<<

I have shot my friends PX4Storm sub-compact in a .40 S&W and it was not hard to handle, some of the worst handguns I've shot are the little pocket pistols in a .380, the R51 is not a pocket pistol, but a sub-compact. Anyway ... My son is a Range Officer at my local gun range, as soon as they get a few I'll be able to run a few rounds through one and see if I like it before I plunk down my $$$.

NOTE: This post was meant to be what I call "Bench Racing" that's where you and the guys sit around the workbench in the garage drinking a few beers and talking crap about how fast your 69 Camero is. Just bench racing !

Physics is physics ..... Big boom .... Small lightweight gun .... Equals uncomfortable and difficult to shoot well .... No getting around it .... What's Remington gonna say ? This gun hurts to shoot it ?

Don't be gullible.

REV

 

[Shooter III]

Physics is physics ..... Big boom .... Small lightweight gun .... Equals uncomfortable and difficult to shoot well .... No getting around it .... What's Remington gonna say ? This gun hurts to shoot it ?

Don't be gullible.

Interesting that your telling me not to be gullible .... does physics not play a part in the way a AR or 50 BMG handles recoil, don't be ignorant.
AND .... as I said above I am going to shoot one before I plunk down 389 bones

 

[revhigh]

Not sure why you're comparing a lightweight small pistol to several rifles, but whatever you need to do is fine. Test firing one is a great idea.

REV

 

[WAYNO]

Have you ever fired a .40 S&W in a small, lightweight pistol? It's not fun.

Yep, and it is what it is. I cannot imagine a smaller, lighter .40 cal pistol than the S&W Shield, and it's doable for anybody that wants it to be so.

If a guy is recoil sensitive enough to worry, then I s'pose he shouldn't be looking at any small handgun in .40.

There is no free ride. :mrgreen:

WAYNO.

 

[DonD]

I think MSRP is now $420. Had hoped it would be shorter than the 6.6” but it does seem like an interesting gun. Don

 

[Shooter III]

Not sure why you're comparing a lightweight small pistol to several rifles, but whatever you need to do is fine. Test firing one is a great idea.

REV

What I am getting at is there are different ways to manufacture stuff, an AR has a gas tube / recoil buffer system. So there are options to handle recoil in rifles. And the same hold true for pistols ... I don't deal well with people that have closed minds and just blurted out "it will never work" .... thinking of possibilities outside the box took us to the moon, came up with things like the AR -15 system ... so I believe it is possible Remington came up with something that has possibilities

 

[22/45 Fan]

What I am getting at is there are different ways to manufacture stuff, an AR has a gas tube / recoil buffer system. So there are options to handle recoil in rifles. And the same hold true for pistols ... I don't deal well with people that have closed minds and just blurted out "it will never work" .... thinking of possibilities outside the box took us to the moon, came up with things like the AR -15 system ... so I believe it is possible Remington came up with something that has possibilities

Do you work for Remington? Are you on the R51 marketing team? Otherwise what you are saying makes no sense.

Remington has just taken a design from the early 20th century and modernized it a bit. It is a modified lock breech gun just like dozens and dozens of other pistol designs previous and current. There is no magic recoil absorption system or anything that modifies or avoids the laws of motion.

Closed minds? "It will never work"? All we are saying is that a small, light pistol in 40 S&W is going to recoil hard. Sure it will work, but it will kick a lot while doing it. What's closed minded or dismissive about that?

 

[Shooter III]

What I am getting at is there are different ways to manufacture stuff, an AR has a gas tube / recoil buffer system. So there are options to handle recoil in rifles. And the same hold true for pistols ... I don't deal well with people that have closed minds and just blurted out "it will never work" .... thinking of possibilities outside the box took us to the moon, came up with things like the AR -15 system ... so I believe it is possible Remington came up with something that has possibilities

Do you work for Remington? Are you on the R51 marketing team? Otherwise what you are saying makes no sense.

Remington has just taken a design from the early 20th century and modernized it a bit. It is a modified lock breech gun just like dozens and dozens of other pistol designs previous and current. There is no magic recoil absorption system or anything that modifies or avoids the laws of motion.

Closed minds? "It will never work"? All we are saying is that a small, light pistol in 40 S&W is going to recoil hard. Sure it will work, but it will kick a lot while doing it. What's closed minded or dismissive about that?

Has anyone here shot a R51 yet .... I don't think so ! My whole intent with this post was just to talk about it, shoot it when its available and see if I like .... I still stand firm that some of you refuse to believe that there is a possibility it won't be as bad as you think ..... You're just dead set on your belief .... Grrrrrr .40 Grrrrr recoil hard Grrrrr Bad !!!!! So run with it

 

[Snake45]

Very good and thorough writeup of the gun in the current issue of Guns & Ammo. In fact, one of the better new gun reviews I've read in that rag in the last decade. :shock:

Can hardly wait to see what my friend Mas Ayoob has to say about it--he'll prolly be writing it up for either Guns or American Handgunner.

 

[Shooter III]

Very good and thorough writeup of the gun in the current issue of Guns & Ammo. In fact, one of the better new gun reviews I've read in that rag in the last decade. :shock:

Can hardly wait to see what my friend Mas Ayoob has to say about it--he'll prolly be writing it up for either Guns or American Handgunner.

Ayoob is da' Man .... I'll have to go read it. After I end up shooting a R51, if I like it I'll plunk the cash down on one, ultimately I'd like to replace my Bersa .380 and go with just one caliber of pistols to simplify ammo purchase .... I like having choices when I carry and I hope the R51 will satisfy my want in a sub-compact.

 

[Al James]

I'm not overly excited about the new r51 but figured I would chime in with my .02 anyways. Even though some of the resident "experts" here usually discount my opinion immediately without any attempt at critical thinking here it goes:

Shooter III is not gullible....he's simply acknowledging the obvious differences in how any said firearms design reduces or eliminates recoil. The operating system of a firearm directly affects the felt recoil. His metaphorical use of a 50 BMG and AR15 are both completely relevant. Designers have devised ways to lessen or completely eliminate recoil using mechanical advantage. If all variables are removed (weight, muzzle brakes, etc) A locked breech single shot will recoil the most as all of the cartridges energy is directed towards the shooter (think TC encore). A blowback action whether direct or delayed, while less than a single shot, will still transfer quite a bit of recoil straight back to the operator (think Sig 232) A recoil operated Browning type swinging link setup really begins to tame felt recoil and was a huge advance in recoil management( think 1911) Then consider other systems such as Ruger's own camblock system or the Magnum research desert eagle which is a gas operated rotating bolt. Of course there are other variables such as bore axis height, overall weight, slide weight, recoil spring weight, etc. But to deny that the mechanical design of a firearm does not directly affect felt recoil is to ignore the facts of the matter.

I'm not saying the R51 is the pistol version of the recoilless rifle, but if a design team sets out to design a pistol with less felt recoil than what were all accustomed to, in a lightweight pistol...it can be done. Of course you can only deny physics to a certain degree so a small gripped, lightweight 40 cal is still going to recoil its just a matter if it will be a "slighty snappy push" or a "my hand is bleeding and I want my mommy big punch". How much less felt recoil a particular design can offer is up for debate but ultimately the proof will be in the shooting. I'm looking forward to any new designs from ANY manufacturer that offer us a lower recoiling pistol. Especially if its a little 40, which have always been too much for some people to handle effectively. Just my .02.

 

[Shooter III]

I'm not overly excited about the new r51 but figured I would chime in with my .02 anyways. Even though some of the resident "experts" here usually discount my opinion immediately without any attempt at critical thinking here it goes:

Shooter III is not gullible....he's simply acknowledging the obvious differences in how any said firearms design reduces or eliminates recoil. The operating system of a firearm directly affects the felt recoil. His metaphorical use of a 50 BMG and AR15 are both completely relevant. Designers have devised ways to lessen or completely eliminate recoil using mechanical advantage. If all variables are removed (weight, muzzle brakes, etc) A locked breech single shot will recoil the most as all of the cartridges energy is directed towards the shooter (think TC encore). A blowback action whether direct or delayed, while less than a single shot, will still transfer quite a bit of recoil straight back to the operator (think Sig 232) A recoil operated Browning type swinging link setup really begins to tame felt recoil and was a huge advance in recoil management( think 1911) Then consider other systems such as Ruger's own camblock system or the Magnum research desert eagle which is a gas operated rotating bolt. Of course there are other variables such as bore axis height, overall weight, slide weight, recoil spring weight, etc. But to deny that the mechanical design of a firearm does not directly affect felt recoil is to ignore the facts of the matter.

I'm not saying the R51 is the pistol version of the recoilless rifle, but if a design team sets out to design a pistol with less felt recoil than what were all accustomed to, in a lightweight pistol...it can be done. Of course you can only deny physics to a certain degree so a small gripped, lightweight 40 cal is still going to recoil its just a matter if it will be a "slighty snappy push" or a "my hand is bleeding and I want my mommy big punch". How much less felt recoil a particular design can offer is up for debate but ultimately the proof will be in the shooting. I'm looking forward to any new designs from ANY manufacturer that offer us a lower recoiling pistol. Especially if its a little 40, which have always been too much for some people to handle effectively. Just my .02.

Thank you ! nicely written, you did a far better job of making the point then I did.

Using barrel porting as an example to handle the effect of recoil and muzzle flip, here is my Long drawn out true story, just to continue my point that certain things can be done to handle said effects: When my son wanted to learn to shoot and carry a pistol concealed I told him I would pay for his first Concealed Carry Permit and I did several things, I explained that with a good grip, decent stance you will be able to handle anything, how each particular weapon behaves and how it feels during shooting is another story. first I made him read Massad Ayoob's book "In the Gravest Extreme" and then I taught him how to operate several different styles of pistols, a good grip, and a modified Weaver Stance. During our last Range session before I set him free I rented a five shot .500 S&W with a 4 inch "ported" barrel, keep in mind revolvers tend to have a high bore axis and the ballistics on these on crazy ! Before the Range Officer let me take it to the shooting lane he asked if I have ever shot a Five Hundred before .... I said NO ! He said I need you to do a few things then, it has a light trigger so single action it only, when you get ready to make it go BANG leave your trigger finger out of the trigger well, lean into the pistol a wee bit, cock it, and slowly pull the trigger and due to the barrel porting the recoil is going to come straight back into you hand with almost Zero muzzle flip, Anyway I shot 3 rounds and my son shot 2, on our drive home we both talked about how EZ the 500 was to handle and we laughed a little about the fact the web of our hand felt a little sore. so to come full circle once again I am excited to see if the R51 lives up to what Remington says and if I purchase one I realize this is not a pistol that you'll want to target shoot with for a few hours, its a sub-compact for self-defense use. Also .... if you choose to comment try to respect the fact I'll honor a good intelligent heated debate and I have little tolerance for narrow-minded argumentative attitudes.

 

[Mike J]

Shooter III you might be interested in checking out this review. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-remington-r51/
There are some things he doesn't like about it. I tend not to pay too much attention to some reviewers. Especially if they have never met a gun they didn't like. I prefer to wait until people on the forum boards have them & see what their observations are.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Personal observation . . .

I really, really liked the original 51. Had opportunity to work with one many years ago, and it was a lotta fun . . . and a definitely old-school-classy pistol. Wish I had one.

This thing is NOT a 51. It shares certain similarities in design, but it would appear the execution lacks in several ways. It's yet another smallish pistol in a sea of "new, improved" smallish pistols. If Remington can smooth out some less-than-wonderful bits, it may sell a few.

Your money, your choice. I don't need one.

JMHO

 

[Shooter III]

Shooter III you might be interested in checking out this review. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-remington-r51/
There are some things he doesn't like about it. I tend not to pay too much attention to some reviewers. Especially if they have never met a gun they didn't like. I prefer to wait until people on the forum boards have them & see what their observations are.

LOL !!!!! Well there ya go, women and guns ... ya never know what you'll get until you run a few rounds through them, that's the first upfront honest review I've seen on this weapon, I'm beginning to lose hope.

Thanks !

 

[Mike J]

I'm not saying it isn't a good gun. I'm just saying I think it wise to take a wait & see attitude. For whatever it's worth unlike many on the forum boards I like .40. I like it in a compact (G-19 or 23) sized pistol or a full sized. I own a Kel-Tec P-11 in 9mm that weighs 14 oz.'s unloaded. At one time Kel-Tec offered a .40 caliber version of this gun. I would not want to shoot a gun that size in .40. Maybe the R-51 would be better but like anything else I'll believe it when I see for myself.

 

[Shooter III]

I'm not saying it isn't a good gun. I'm just saying I think it wise to take a wait & see attitude. For whatever it's worth unlike many on the forum boards I like .40. I like it in a compact (G-19 or 23) sized pistol or a full sized. I own a Kel-Tec P-11 in 9mm that weighs 14 oz.'s unloaded. At one time Kel-Tec offered a .40 caliber version of this gun. I would not want to shoot a gun that size in .40. Maybe the R-51 would be better but like anything else I'll believe it when I see for myself.

The issue about re-assembly where not knowing if you did it correctly or not until it stops going "BANG" really bugs me. Personally, I don't want to worry about something like that.

 

[pyth0n]

I like the way they incorporated a retro look and the semi blow back operation. If I didn't already have Kahr P9, which is about an .4" shorter, I'd consider one after they've been out awhile.

 

[rugerguy]

I dunno, the Bersa has been a proven gun over the time we have had, and shot them over the years, and can recall welding up a few "broken" old Remington 51 from years ago, the lug inside the slide cracked off ..hope they 'redesigned' it for the newest.380s, let alone a bigger boomer .40 cal ???
the proof will be in the shooting over and over, out in the field, seems like all too many are so quick to come out with something that just does NOT get "tested" in house, today the 'consumer' is the testing & QC people :roll:
as granddad liked to say "always time to send it back ,under recall and rebuilt it , than taking their time and building it RIGHT in the first place" 8)

 

[22/45 Fan]

...as granddad liked to say "always time to send it back ,under recall and rebuilt it , than taking their time and building it RIGHT in the first place" 8)

A paraphrase of the old cliché: "There's never time to do it right but there's always time to do it over."

The new R51 is highly modified from the 100 year old original both internally and in the materials used. I hope they got it right.

 

[gc70]

Shooter III you might be interested in checking out this review. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-remington-r51/
There are some things he doesn't like about it. I tend not to pay too much attention to some reviewers. Especially if they have never met a gun they didn't like. I prefer to wait until people on the forum boards have them & see what their observations are.

LOL !!!!! Well there ya go, women and guns ... ya never know what you'll get until you run a few rounds through them, that's the first upfront honest review I've seen on this weapon, I'm beginning to lose hope.

Thanks !

You might want to look around a few forums where that "upfront honest review" has been discussed. The review has been substantially changed in response to criticism since it was originally posted.

The original article contained TTAG's sixth complaint of not being invited to Remington's preview testing of the R51 by gunwriters ("But TTAG wasn’t on the guest list to Big Green’s all-expenses-paid junket in the desert to test Stage One guns..."), which was subsequently deleted. A reference to the R51's action being like a Luger's toggle action was roundly ridiculed and that characterization has also been deleted.

TTAG published a separate justification for describing the R51 as painful to shoot, but a "real pussycat" with +P ammo; that description was changed to say +P was no more painful to shoot than regular ammo.

There was a companion article to the review that compared the size of the R51 to other guns and described the R51 as "almost exactly the same size" as a "Commander-size 1911." That description was later changed to a "smaller Officer sized 1911." The comparison gun was actually a Bill Wilson Carry Pistol, which is nearly an inch longer (7.6" vs 6.625") and over a quarter-inch taller (4.9" vs 4.625") than the R51 - hardly "almost exactly the same size."

 

[ArmedinAZ]

The first 9mm R-51 hasn't hit Gunbroker yet and we want the 40? :mrgreen:

At least you won't be one of the first beta testers. The fact that this particular action design was used on 1 handgun and shelved is enough reason to be cautious.

 

[Shooter III]

The first 9mm R-51 hasn't hit Gunbroker yet and we want the 40? :mrgreen:

At least you won't be one of the first beta testers. The fact that this particular action design was used on 1 handgun and shelved is enough reason to be cautious.

Who knows why it got shelved ... lack of interest ? lack of sales ? If I was a shareholder at Remington and a weapon didn't sell I'd discontinue it, at its inception it was only available in .32 and .380 and at that time the .45 1911 was a big hit, if I was around 100 years ago I would of went with the Forty-Five regardless of how innovative it was for it's time.

 

[gc70]

Who knows why it got shelved ... lack of interest ? lack of sales ? If I was a shareholder at Remington and a weapon didn't sell I'd discontinue it, at its inception it was only available in .32 and .380 and at that time the .45 1911 was a big hit, if I was around 100 years ago I would of went with the Forty-Five regardless of how innovative it was for it's time.

The original Remington Model 51 -and all other American semi-autos except the 1911- died out during the Great Depression. The 1911 would probably have ceased production if it had not been supported by military contracts.

 

[Shooter III]

Who knows why it got shelved ... lack of interest ? lack of sales ? If I was a shareholder at Remington and a weapon didn't sell I'd discontinue it, at its inception it was only available in .32 and .380 and at that time the .45 1911 was a big hit, if I was around 100 years ago I would of went with the Forty-Five regardless of how innovative it was for it's time.

The original Remington Model 51 -and all other American semi-autos except the 1911- died out during the Great Depression. The 1911 would probably have ceased production if it had not been supported by military contracts.

Very good point ...