Remington R51 owners will we be stuck with a turkey?

[anthonytrkr]

I jumped on the band wagon like many other people that bought the Remington R51 pistol. There has been reports of excessive chamber pressure. The pistol firing out of battery causing bulged, or separation of the case. My pistol has excessive pressure because the primers are swelled out like balloons. My pistol's slide will lock in the closed position when a round is chambered. It's a struggle clearing the pistol, and I am worrying about having a accidental discharge trying to clear it. The accuracy of my pistol sucks. I could get better groups if I threw it. I read all the reviews I could find before buying this pistol and thought the pistol was double action. It's not. There is no safety to speak of. The pistol has a grip safety that is listed as a passive safety. Squeeze the grip while holstering the pistol and have the holster snag the trigger and you have just shot your self. Is Remington trying to promote gun control by building firearms that kill there owners because the designs are dangerous?

[shoot-n-lead]

Sounds like your gun needs to be returned to have the pressure situation checked.

I was mildly interested in the R51 after reading some of the reviews. However, my first experience of holding one, quickly took care of any desire that I had of buying one.

[anthonytrkr]

Own one?

[country gent]

Yoy didnt state the loads causing "excessive" pressure are the factory loads, self defense, +p, +p+, factory practice or ball loads< or handloads of some sort? Firing out of battery is a serious issue and a concern. Lack of accuracy is a judgement call you just say it dosnt shoot accuratly no groups/range, or how its being tested. I also agree with other posters to keep finger off of trigger until ready to shoot. First contact remington with these issues be clear and consice about the issues including group size and ammo used to test. Keep track of who you speak to and when. I have been watching for one of these to come into the local gun shop to look over as I remember the original remington 51 in 32 and 380 calibers and always liked them. Glocks and several others dont have a saftey per say other than the passive inset in the trigger. I would much perfer the grip saftey over those if done right. Revolvers have no saftey normally. A stated above the most important "saftey" is between the ears.

[mpbarry1]

I really dont think the R51 is a bad design. the problem is the Pedersen drsign requires hand fitting to work reliably. the guns remington gave the original testers were all hand fitted and worked perfectly. this of course requires more labor and thus more money. I am hopeful that they will be able to fix the manufacturing issues.

Country gave some good advice above. make them make this right. You shoud havea good carry gun.

BTW. Lovelife really is a good guy.

[williamwaco]

I have one. Bought it about a month ago.
It is one of the best looking and best pointing handguns I have ever seen.

It was the worst fitted and finished handgun I have ever held/fired.
Nothing fit.
Nothing worked.
Couldn't open the slide.
Once it was opened it wouldn't close.
Wouldn't feed FMJ factory loads.
When it did close there was not enough power in the recoil spring to strip a cartridge off the top of the clip and close the slide.
It did occasionally fire our of battery.

I started with one round in the magazine. It took about twenty attempts to get the slide to feed it and close and then I fired it.
When it worked well enough to feed one, I loaded two and repeated the process, then three.

After this I loaded the magazine full and fired until it failed to feed. Then I refilled the magazine and tried again.
It took over 200 rounds to finally fire a complete magazine without failure to feed.

Then I worked the slide at home while I was watching TV. After 3,000 dry fire cycles it has slicked up and is now a delight.
I love it.

It was a very bad child but it has now grown up to be a good friend.

[mpbarry1]

you are welcome to leave the same way you came in. congrats, you are the first person on my ignore list. civility is the key here. be civil or go.

[shoot-n-lead]

Stop looking and pointing the pistol. Remington is swamped with the returns without any way of repairing these pistols. The people responding on this site are clueless. They are trying to bolster there egos. They have no experience with weapons of any kind. I have been drawn into these disputes and will not let this happen again.

If you know so much...why did you buy the gun?

You are quick to point fingers and call people names...but you are the one that made the mistake of buying the gun.

Or, are you just a typical troll?

[TXSlade]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aTzS4sQfn4U

Watch this vid, you can watch a real time round fire w/o ejecting. He will show the brass casing bulged etc. So, obviously the gun is flawed. By the way, it is the second one he has received, the first the slide was not able to be moved w/o leaving skin behind.

Note: I think I have this link set up to start the video at the point of the case problem. If not it's at 7:30ish.

[Scout800a]

Love Life, don't take this guy seriously, I'm embarrassed for him.

[TXSlade]

Also, I've read many of Mr. Love Life's posts, I mean he only has 10,000 of them. Lol. I think he was responding to info he was given. I doubt he was trying to denigrate the op. I've found him always to have helpful and useful info.

Just an opinion.

[waksupi]

Bear the cross you have got to be kidding. This pistol is rated at 9mm+p. At target level loads the pistol is having pressure problems. I can't for the life of me understand why u asses cant understand this. This pistol was the hottest thing at the 2014 gun show. Why am I having to deal with all the misinformed goobers about this weapon. Shut your self up about this unless you know the facts.

You know, this kind of post is exactly why this board is going down hill. If you can't address people better than this, get off this board. We don't need you. I was asked today to come back on staff on this board. I know what one of my first actions would be, had I accepted.

[crazy mark]

Not you as a moderator again WAKSUPI. I would be doomed for being cheap. :-) You were a very fair moderator however.

[waksupi]

Not you as a moderator again WAKSUPI. I would be doomed for being cheap. :-) You were a very fair moderator however.

Want me to send you a roll of toilet paper? The good stuff? ;)

[bedbugbilly]

Let's get back on track please . . . .

I was looking forward to the R51 coming out after seeing the initial reviews. After they have been in production though, most of what I see are complaints on a number of issues with the model R51. Remington isn't the first gun company to have "issues" with a model when they release them. I've personally decided to not buy one and hold off until Remington either proves they can solve the issues or discontinues the model. It's too bad as this pistol could have been a good thing for them and possibly other models to follow. I'm sure that some R51s probably work just fine and for those owners, Im happy. But, most of the reviews I'm seeing are form those that have them and have issues. Unfortunately, there are too many other makes and models out there that work from the get go. Hopefully they'll figure it out . . . if not, the R51 will probably be dropped and become a "collector's item" in years to come.

[Harry O]

Williamwaco: I stand in awe of your patience.

[williamwaco]

Williamwaco: I stand in awe of your patience.

65 years experience "fooling" with "The latest and greatest" has taught me three things.

1) New babies rarely arrive without birthing pains.

2) It would cost me over $50.00 shipping and insurance to return it and it would be gone from three months to a year.

3) If it is fixable, I can usually fix it in a couple of weeks "twiddling".

[OBXPilgrim]

So, how many posts were deleted from this thread? I clicked into this thinking I might learn something the new gun that I've only seen once, but instead got a real education. But It looks like I've missed a bunch.

[Tackleberry41]

I was reading along, going wait where did somebody say that?

Did a little reading, had the idea it was originally a blow back gun in 32 and 380. The pederson system may have worked with those rounds, a bit different when your dealing with 9mm or 40S$W. Modern cost cutting methods dont really work when hand fitting is required. Not very bright to think it would. Many companies are going with that MIM cast process, and apparently cant fit such parts, they work or dont.

Firing out of battery would be a big problem for any gun.

[Tackleberry41]

Looked up some reviews. There were plenty of gun mag glowing reviews, I tend to take them with a grain of salt, they would say dog poo ice cream was the best flavor ever.

Other reviews were not very kind. That its not very easy to take apart to begin with, and even harder to reassemble. And can be done wrong, cant believe they would think that would fly. I put my 1911 together wrong, I know how, but if you did you would know right away. The remington it seems will function normally, until you really need it then just quit. And if you do assemble it right still may not work very good.

None of this makes sense to me. Making guns that barely work, or not at all, is not a good way to make money. This seems to be beyond 'teething problems' some things have when they first come out. Is this like the xbox, where somebody said were in to deep, just send em out and we will fix them later?

[Uncle R.]

I was reading along, going wait where did somebody say that?

Did a little reading, had the idea it was originally a blow back gun in 32 and 380. The pederson system may have worked with those rounds, a bit different when your dealing with 9mm or 40S$W. Modern cost cutting methods dont really work when hand fitting is required. Not very bright to think it would. Many companies are going with that MIM cast process, and apparently cant fit such parts, they work or dont.

Firing out of battery would be a big problem for any gun.

The original 51 was actually a locked breech pistol - an unusual delayed recoil operated system. Like so many of Pederson's designs it was kinda off-the-wall but downright ingenious as well. Take an original 51 and try to push the slide open with a pencil down the bore - it won't open beyond a fraction of an inch as the breech bolt is locked to the frame. The moving slide first locks and then after a delay unlocks the bolt when the gun is actually fired. The design advantages over a blowback were lighter slide mass and less recoil. The original 51s were sweet to shoot and great natural pointers, but they had lots of intricate machining and thus were expensive to manufacture. A Mercedes design for a Chevy application - it's a wonder that Remington sold as many as they did. I sure do like mine though. I wish Remington could re-introduce the originals but I doubt they could compete even now with the true blowback pistols.
<
Uncle R.

[JHeath]

I have an original Model 51 and like it a lot. I am sure with modern materials and manufacture techniques Remington can make the new version in 9mm+P work.

A lot of people are pronouncing the R51 junk, unworkable, etc. I am sure this is an overreaction but whether Remington will prove so is another question.

For about 30 years people said ARs were junk. Poor long range accuracy, an inherited reputation for unreliability, and the perception of low quality. Now it's wall-to-wall ARs, the quality is high, and they can beat M1As at service rifle shooting. All because the basic design was sound and just needed development by people determined to make them work.

I think the R51 needs just a little effort to put it over the top, but R doesn't have a 30 year grace period. It sounds like something as simple as the chamber reamer may be the issue. But if there are other issues, the Model 51 proves that the concept is sound and just needs production-line tweaks.

[mpbarry1]

I agree Jheath. It is a great design w poor manufactuing practices. I have been very interested in this since it was rumored. I yruely hope R stands behind these and makes it right for even socially challenged folks. lol

[pull the trigger]

I have one. Bought it about a month ago.
It is one of the best looking and best pointing handguns I have ever seen.

It was the worst fitted and finished handgun I have ever held/fired.
Nothing fit.
Nothing worked.
Couldn't open the slide.
Once it was opened it wouldn't close.
Wouldn't feed FMJ factory loads.
When it did close there was not enough power in the recoil spring to strip a cartridge off the top of the clip and close the slide.
It did occasionally fire our of battery.

I started with one round in the magazine. It took about twenty attempts to get the slide to feed it and close and then I fired it.
When it worked well enough to feed one, I loaded two and repeated the process, then three.

After this I loaded the magazine full and fired until it failed to feed. Then I refilled the magazine and tried again.
It took over 200 rounds to finally fire a complete magazine without failure to feed.

Then I worked the slide at home while I was watching TV. After 3,000 dry fire cycles it has slicked up and is now a delight.
I love it.

It was a very bad child but it has now grown up to be a good friend.

So, do you think most others are fixable as yours was? Did you use any sort of lube on it while braking it in? Would you consider it 100% dependable now?
I also was very interested in an R51 but was very concerned of the quality just because of the Marlin take over disgusting fit and finish problems.

[Tackleberry41]

The original 51 was actually a locked breech pistol - an unusual delayed recoil operated system. Like so many of Pederson's designs it was kinda off-the-wall but downright ingenious as well. Take an original 51 and try to push the slide open with a pencil down the bore - it won't open beyond a fraction of an inch as the breech bolt is locked to the frame. The moving slide first locks and then after a delay unlocks the bolt when the gun is actually fired. The design advantages over a blowback were lighter slide mass and less recoil. The original 51s were sweet to shoot and great natural pointers, but they had lots of intricate machining and thus were expensive to manufacture. A Mercedes design for a Chevy application - it's a wonder that Remington sold as many as they did. I sure do like mine though. I wish Remington could re-introduce the originals but I doubt they could compete even now with the true blowback pistols.
<
Uncle R.

Think thats what happened here. Remington took a pistol, that back then was 'mercedes design for a chevy application' and tried to make it today without doing any of the intricate work the originals required, then to make it worse, used more powerful ammo in them. You know there were gun guys at remington saying this aint gonna work, and the corporate guys said, shut up and make em. Used to see it all the time working on cars, great ideas, flawed execution, usually because the accountants got ahold of it. The new R51 might be a $800 gun to do the work properly, like the originals. But not many were gonna lay out that kind of cash for a remington pistol, when you can get a Sig, or HK etc.

Stuff I read said the first ones they handed out to be evaluated worked well, but had been hand fitted so they would work. Then just said screw it skip that step and put em in boxes for everybody else. Nobody will notice.

Question is since Remington really isnt a gun company but run by wall street guys. Will they simply do the math, take the loss and drop the project? Or come out with some sort of half *** fix that doesnt quite fix all the problems, but good enough? Dont see them actually laying out the cash to do a proper fix, the price would go up on future models, cutting sales.

[Rick Hodges]

"Question is since Remington really isnt a gun company but run by wall street guys."

What the heck does that mean? All publicly traded companies that sell stock fall into this...yep Ruger, even Sig Sauer and H&K (although it would be European stock markets)
Of course Remington is a gun company and it is answerable to its stockholders, just like every other company. By your definition there really aren't any "gun companies".

[Petrol & Powder]

I had an original model 51 and liked it. It worked but I recall that it was built like a Swiss watch inside. Lots of small forged and machined parts that had to be fitted. I'm sure that it would be prohibitively expensive to build that same gun now.
I like the concept of the new R51 but haven't put my hands on one yet. The shape and contour, the materials, the 9mm chambering and the operating system all look promising to me. If WilliamWaco could make his function I suspect the design is sound but there may be manufacturing issues. Meanwhile, I'll sit in the tall grass and watch.

[scattershot]

Looked up some reviews. There were plenty of gun mag glowing reviews, I tend to take them with a grain of salt, they would say dog poo ice cream was the best flavor ever.



Yeah, you have to take those reviews with a BIG grain of salt. I remember reviews on the Bren Ten that gave glowing reports, and they didn't even have magazines for them.

[Tackleberry41]

"Question is since Remington really isnt a gun company but run by wall street guys."

What the heck does that mean? All publicly traded companies that sell stock fall into this...yep Ruger, even Sig Sauer and H&K (although it would be European stock markets)
Of course Remington is a gun company and it is answerable to its stockholders, just like every other company. By your definition there really aren't any "gun companies".

Yes Ruger is a public company and has stock holders, but is still run by gun people, its not just about the money with them. Yea they like money, but making a decent gun is still a big consideration. Remington is a corporate aquisition, owned by a hedge fund. Look at Marlin, its just a name now. The fund bought what was left of the company, pretty much fired everybody who knew how to make marlins, started making them in a remington factory. And it shows in the quality of their products. Wall street people only care about the math. Somewhere in this R51 disaster, somebody sat down and figured out they could make money somehow. Doubt making quality gun was really a consideration, the original gun had a mystic and reputation, they used that make money. Same thing happened to Gibson guitars. They had alot of problems, nearly went out of business, wall street guy bought it. He doesnt care about music or guitars, just the dollar signs. Gibson made a name as a quality instrument made by people who love guitars, now its all about advertising, moving more lower priced units out of the warehouse, volume not quality. From what I read Gibson is a nightmare place to work, like wal mart is run. Corporate office has all the say, guys at the bottom are just monkeys, not luthiers. Run all the guys off who knew anything, replaced with low paid grunts. At some point after all that can be gotten is gotten, they will gut it to make a few more bucks, or farm it all out to china.

It always tends to be short term profits at the expense of the long term. The R51 will hurt them. Those who have them certainly wont be buying another one, and probably think long and hard about buying something that says Remington on the side again, I would. Others thinking about a purchase, may say well Ill just buy a savage or whatever. But guys in the boardroom dont care about that, they made a dollar today. They will just move onto the next project to suck the life out of.

[HangFireW8]

I don't dispute the need for hand fitting but I lay that at Remington's feet not Pederson's. Pederson designed everything with manufacture in mind and designed the manufacturing jigs alongside the component or even before. That way he had total control over fit and quality even before the first component was built. His tool&die men got plans for the jigs and fixtures first instead of figuring out how to make them from the parts drawing. So guess who's fault the modern fittings problems belong to....

[williamwaco]

1)So, do you think most others are fixable as yours was?
2)Did you use any sort of lube on it while braking it in?
3)Would you consider it 100% dependable now?
4)I also was very interested in an R51 but was very concerned of the quality just because of the Marlin take over disgusting fit and finish problems.

1) Don't know. I have only handled one.

2) Lube. Yes, J&B Bore Paste

3) Yes ( probably ) has not missed a lick in 300 rounds ( after the break in and cleaning out all the bore paste. And lubing with Frog Lube.

4) Fit and Finish - that was the entire problem. This piece was never handled after initial assembly - or ( surely not ) they just didn't care that it was non functional .

[FergusonTO35]

Looks like the R51 may be Remington's All-American 2000. That's unfortunate because its a really sweet looking looking piece and not a Glockoff like everybody else makes nowadays.

[JHeath]

I have not seen any evidence that the Model 51 / R51 basic design requires extensive hand fitting. And modern CAD and production methods can make intricate mechanical systems much more effectively than hand drawing and hand labor. The R51 design is probably entirely workable at the price point Remington figured.

A new 1911 is much finer than an old GI grade, and hand fitting is not the reason. Modern production makes it better.

Just needs better QA out the door.

[Petrol & Powder]

Any update to this topic? I'm curious about this pistol.

[bruce drake]

If they had kept the new R51 in 380 like the original...Whoa nelly! I'd have bet a lot more people would be talking the praises of the pistol and its design. making it another pocket 9mm Parabellum just added way too many new gremlins to the mix for a reintroduced pistol.

Me. I'd have jumped all over a new R51 in either .380 or 32 ACP. I own a switch-barrel 1911 in 38 Super/9mm Para and a FEG P35 hi-power in 9mm Para already so the desire to add another 9mm to the gunsafe just isn't there as long as they continue to have fit and function issues.

[Petrol & Powder]

I have just the opposite view. The .380 auto was a viable option when there were no small 9mm autos to be had. For a simple blowback operated semi-auto; .380 (9mm x17mm) is about as large as one can go. The 9x18 Makarov was a bit of an exception. There was a time when I would recommend pistols such as the Walther PPK or Sig P230 for those seeking a small semi-auto pistol. Now we have a large amount of very compact, locked breach semi-autos chambered in 9mm Lugar to choose from.
With the availability of pistols such as the Kahr MK9 or PM9 and others in that class, I no longer see the .380 auto as a first choice. I am NOT saying that .380 Auto is a bad cartridge, I'm just saying we have better options now.

[9.3X62AL]

I am NOT saying that .380 Auto is a bad cartridge, I'm just saying we have better options now.

I would be inclined toward the belief that the R-51 is NOT one of those better options, though.

[Petrol & Powder]

Unfortunately, you may be correct. I was really hopeful that Remington would get the R51 right. I like the concept. Smooth, snag-free lines, grip safety, low bore axis, slim, light weight and an overall compact 9mm pistol. I had one of the original model 51's in 380 and it was a cool little gun but too much like a Swiss watch inside. It wouldn't reliably feed hollow points so it was of little use to me other than a neat piece of history.

[scaevola]

Interesting thread, too bad antagonistic posts have left it disjointed.

I, too, was looking forward to the R51. Before I ever laid eyes on one the problems began to show up in forum posts. When I finally saw one it was larger and less impressive than I expected. I'll pass on buying one.

[JHeath]

Unfortunately, you may be correct. I was really hopeful that Remington would get the R51 right. I like the concept. Smooth, snag-free lines, grip safety, low bore axis, slim, light weight and an overall compact 9mm pistol. I had one of the original model 51's in 380 and it was a cool little gun but too much like a Swiss watch inside. It wouldn't reliably feed hollow points so it was of little use to me other than a neat piece of history.

My understanding is that .380 lacks enough velocity for hollowpoints to expand anyway, and it's just as well to load a .380 with FMJ and rely on proportionally increased placement, grit, and desperation. I've got FMJ in my Model 51. Ballistically, this means I need similar levels of grit and desperation as the guys who fought it out with Navy Colts. Quickload won't tell me if I've got that.

It seems that with a little more slide mass and careful engineering Remington could have made a 9mm +P update of the Model 51. Unless they are willing to put a lot of effort into a re-launch of a corrected product, it's getting too late to overcome the bad reviews of a pistol few of us ever got to see.

Too bad. Some will remain boxed and become collectibles. A few will probably be worked over by owners until they become the slick little pistol they were meant to be.

[rking22]

I too was looking forward to getting my hands on one of these. When I finally did, I was disappointed that it felt nor pointed anything like an original 51. Rather like a bigger LCP, at least its metal, but .. I might still pich one up at a "fire sale" price, just to see if I can make it work right , and to see if I might even come to like it. I have always been a Remington fan, am completely defeated with their poor QC out the door. I work with CNC machining equipment, they can produce this product, they just have to keep the out of spec components out of the assembly stream! Would actually like to help them with that now that they are coming south.

[monge]

when I buy a new or used gun I take it home pull it apart inspect it . them I start deburring sharp egdes and polishing were it needs to be smooth.Only two guns I bought that could be shout right out of the box my BFR, and My brownig citori.The remlin guide gun I bought was very ruff but after some fit and finish work its now one of my favorites. stay on rem they will fix the issues Me I kind of like fixing them my self if it turns out to be a keeper I appreciate more.

[Petrol & Powder]

I enjoy working on guns and I would have no problem correcting minor defects on a new gun as long as I knew those minor fitting issues could be fixed. However, most people don't want to spend money on a defective new firearm and then be required to fix it. Remington needs to improve their QC if they want the R51 to be a sales success.
If I can find one at a decent price I wouldn't mind playing with one but I'm not willing to sink a lot of money into that project.

[FergusonTO35]

I've seen it announced in a few places that Remington is now offering to replace all the R51's sold so far and give the owners two extra mags with the replacement gun. Maybe they will get it right in round 2, or maybe not. I'm thinking that the pistol's reputation has been permanently damaged and potential sales truncated, even if they have come up with a real fix for it.

[Salmoneye]

I've seen it announced in a few places that Remington is now offering to replace all the R51's sold so far and give the owners two extra mags with the replacement gun. Maybe they will get it right in round 2, or maybe not. I'm thinking that the pistol's reputation has been permanently damaged and potential sales truncated, even if they have come up with a real fix for it.

Fair Use of A Public Announcement:



Remington R51 Pistol Product Update Earlier this year, we launched the innovative R51 subcompact pistol to critical acclaim. During testing, numerous experts found the pistol to function flawlessly.
In fact, they found it to have lower felt recoil, lower muzzle rise and better accuracy and concealability than other products in its class.
However, after initial commercial sales, our loyal customers notified us that some R51 pistols had performance issues. We immediately ceased production to re-test the product. While we determined the pistols were safe, certain units did not meet Remington’s performance criteria. The performance problems resulted from complications during our transition from prototype to mass production.
These problems have been identified and solutions are being implemented, with an expected production restart in October.
Anyone who purchased an R51 may return it and receive a new R51 pistol, along with two additional magazines and a custom Pelican case, by calling Remington at (800) 243-9700.
The new R51 will be of the same exceptional quality as our test pistols, which performed flawlessly.
We appreciate your patience and support.

http://bearingarms.com/remington-announces-r51-pistol-production-update/

[FergusonTO35]

Wow, talk about a self-congratulatory recall/service bulletin!!

[kencha]

The statement is on Remington's site now too: http://www.remington.com/pages/news-and-resources/press-releases/2014/corporate/remingtonr51pistolproductupdate.aspx

I'll definitely be exchanging mine. It is nowhere near as bad as some, but the binding disconnector and seemingly premature wear on the bolt make me wonder. Besides, I'll take the free case and mags.

I'll wait until October+ though.

[45coltnut]

I think this is a good and promising step for Remington. I'm glad to see them doing this. This is a pistol that I wouldn't mind owning for carry.

[nekshot]

What price are these selling at? I don't mind giving a gun a little personal touch!

[MtGun44]

Seems like they are admitting problems and promising to fix them. Once the error is made,
what more could they possibly do?

Certainly, a flawed introduction is a black mark, but in the end, if they make it good, I'd
give them credit for doing the right thing.

Now we wait for the 2.0 guns to show up and see if they are really fixed.

Bill

PS seeing a couple of amazingly rude and obnoxious posts (quotes, the originals have
been scrubbed) I certainly hope a few folks are no longer permitted here.

[JHeath]

Good updates, thanks guys. The R51 is back on my short list, and my 1921 Model 51 looking forward to spending less time at the office and more at the senior rec center.

[JeffG]

I've had a hankering for the R51 too, can't wait to feel one.

[cwheel]

Remington won't be the first to recall their pistols, first part of this year I got my Springfield XDs 45 back from a recall. Yes it was out for 14 weeks within two weeks of buying it, I wasn't happy. Guess the test of any company and product is how they stand behind it. My lesson learned is not to listen to the initial reviews so much, let a little time pass first, and then check them out for a more honest review. Sounds like this is exactly what happened to the P51 as well. Gun writers often act as a ( paid ?? ) advertiser for the manufactures and I'd suspect are far less critical than we think they are, or should be.
Chris

[FergusonTO35]

I like to wait at least 6 months or so before I bite on a new gun or other expensive consumer product. Let all the bugs shake out first.

[kencha]

Does anyone have experience with returning the R51?
Remington's statement said production of the revised version should have started last Oct.

If you called about the return, are they offering refunds, taking your pistol and making you wait in the dark, putting you on a list and making you wait in the dark, or did they give you any further information?

[kencha]

In case anyone else was wondering (although, after finding out and doing a search, I am apparently the last R51 owner to know)...

I just called Remington. They gave 2 options regarding the R51 exchange program. Wait for the replacements to be released (now expected late Q2 2015), or exchange it for a standard 1911.

[376Steyr]

FWIW, Remington currently shows the R51 in their 2015 online catalog.

[natoround]

The standard 1911 swap sounds like a good deal to me. You can always wait and se what the R 51 does and buy one later for less than the price of the 1911.

[Petrol & Powder]

So, It looks like Remington is about to get the new & improved R51 back into the retail pipeline. Has anyone seen a new R51 version 2.0 for sale?

[MtGun44]

A report from Shot Show says Rem was predicting "summer" before they would be back on
dealer's shelves.

Bill

[Petrol & Powder]

So, Does anyone know the statues of the R51?
Has anyone seen a "new" one ?

[gwpercle]

Twenty years from now it will be a "collectable" !

[Petrol & Powder]

It does seem like New Coke vs. Classic Coca-Cola but I'm really hoping Remington can make it work. It's an excellent concept if they can get the production models to work like the pre-production ones.

[murf205]

Remington REALLY needs to get their head and behind wired together. Their reputation is now, only a glowing ember in the once proud company Mike Walker ran. The brand has turned into the Yugo of guns. I really like the looks of the R51 but when you are going to carry a pistol that might have to save your life, a recalled one is NOT what I'm looking for. Does anyone know just how many recalls Rem has had in recent times?

[376Steyr]

FWIW Davidson's Gallery of Guns is showing the R51 as "allocated", the same status as the new 380 Auto.

[Petrol & Powder]

There is NO doubt that Remington could have and should have; done a better job before they released the R51.
I have not shot one or even held one in my hand so my information is limited but the concept seems very sound to me. Clearly the pre-production pistols were better than the production models. That lack of quality control is not an excuse but I'm not ready to condemn the design or the concept. In fact, I think the concept is very good.
A credible self-defense cartridge with decent capacity. An aluminum receiver with a single stack magazine, a passive grip safety, a very low bore axis coupled with a Pederson derived hesitation lock and a slim, sleek, rounded exterior. There's a lot to like in the overall package. Shame on Remington for not getting it right when it went into production but I'm really hoping they can fix it and earn some respect.

[Salmoneye]

FWIW Davidson's Gallery of Guns is showing the R51 as "allocated", the same status as the new 380 Auto.

The Marlin 1894C has said "allocated" since they shut down the lines in 2012...

No sign of it yet...

[FergusonTO35]

The latest crop of Remlins here appears to be as nice as the last batch of JM Marlins so maybe there is hope that Remmy is getting it together. My local dealer says he hasn't had many problems with them.

[dragon813gt]

The Marlin 1894C has said "allocated" since they shut down the lines in 2012...

No sign of it yet...

I know it's been pushed back multiple times. But production is scheduled to resume in September. The last batch of 1894s in 44 have no issues that I've heard of. And I have one of the last 1894Cs made before they shut down production. No issues w/ that as well.

Slightly off topic but has anyone bought a new Ruger lately? I've bought five in the last twelve months. Four of them had to go back to the factory to be fixed. Their quality control is severely lacking. So no gun manufacturer is w/out their problems.

[Blackwater]

It's so typical and regrettable that so many once great American companies today, seem to be so inept at producing good technically oriented products. I think a lot of it goes back to when Harvard Business School decided to advocate that the leaders of companies had no real NEED to know the technicalities of production, and only really needed to manage the money and the people. This seemed at the outset, to an old country boy and hobbiest gunsmith like me, to be ludicrous on the face of it, but then, I'm no Harvard MBA either. But since then, it seems some really highly touted MBA's from Harvard and other business schools that have followed that ethic and concept, have driven some fine and large American companies in the dirt. Einstein once said that if we just find the right question, the answers usually jump out at you as self-evident. Apparently, these Harvard MBA's couldn't find their butts with their hands tied behind their backs? And as Sonny and Cher sang, "The beat goes on." Some of them, at least, have had the simple common good sense to finally ASK someone who DOES know how to git-r-done, and let THEM handle the production part. Decrees from "on high" have done little but frustrate and dismay so many, many capable people who DO know how to get things done, and no matter how good an idea is, you've GOT to find someone who can answer the question "Now how do we go about making this a reality," and this just isn't something MBA's tend to be able to answer, and in far too many cases, they simply fail to recognize this little but relevant aspect of production that DOES make a HUGE difference in companies.

A life-long friend of mine works at Daniel Defense, and Marty Daniels, the proprietor, DOES know from MUCH exe what helps and hurts AR's, and he learned how to GET those things BEFORE he ever formed his company. And it's really going well, too, expanding and maybe adding a new product soon that will be high end, but superb if HE has anything to do with it. Marty's also a friend of my son's, and everyone who knows Marty (I don't really) says he's a first class person in EVERY regard. Now THAT is the type of CEO that "CAN DO," and gets things done. There's also the fact that if I ever got one of Marty's guns and it wasn't "right" in any way, he'd make it right by whatever means necessary and possible. THAT is the way to run a gun company!

[Hickory]

I'm really hoping Remington can make it work.

I've been hoping the same thing with the Marlin 1894 lever guns.

[murf205]

I know it's been pushed back multiple times. But production is scheduled to resume in September. The last batch of 1894s in 44 have no issues that I've heard of. And I have one of the last 1894Cs made before they shut down production. No issues w/ that as well.

Slightly off topic but has anyone bought a new Ruger lately? I've bought five in the last twelve months. Four of them had to go back to the factory to be fixed. Their quality control is severely lacking. So no gun manufacturer is w/out their problems.

Yep, me too. Last 3. A Lipsey 44 spl front sight was WAY too tall, 22 Hunter semi auto that wouldn't feed from any magazine or fire with anything but single feed round, and an American in 22-250 that I bought because it was advertised to have a 1-10 twist but when I measured it it was a 1-14. The mini 14 was the 4th one and it feed and functioned like a dream, but 4-5" groups were ALL it would do, and 6-7" were the norm. Yes it was the New and improved model. To be fair, Ruger fixed all the 1st 3 problems without a whimper. The Mini no longer resides here.
Murf

[Outpost75]

I find it disheartening, if amusing that nobody in this thread has seen fit to repeat the timeless bit of wisdom which says,


"NEVER, EVER fly the "A" Model of anything!"
World War II Pilot Officer Edward Thompson of 433 (RCAF) Squadron.

[Salmoneye]

I know it's been pushed back multiple times. But production is scheduled to resume in September.

Remington has been saying "Next Quarter" on the 1894C for more than a year and a half...

Let me know when it actually happens...

[mjwcaster]

I find it disheartening, if amusing that nobody in this thread has seen fit to repeat the timeless bit of wisdom which says,


"NEVER, EVER fly the "A" Model of anything!"
World War II Pilot Officer Edward Thompson of 433 (RCAF) Squadron.

I agree, lived on the bleeding edge of technology for a living, it's fun but it can hurt, especially in a 24/7 environment where things have to work.
The older/more experienced I got the more conservative I became.
If it aint broke, don't fix it became my motto, big change from the kid that wanted all the latest and greatest, just because it was new.

I for one could not believe the lines at the 2014 NRA show for the R-51. Just shook my head and wondered how bad it was going to be.
Have a student who got one, it was not functioning, took 3 hands to get the slide lock/spring into the right position. It worked after that.
Last I heard (a few weeks ago) he had opted for another R51, had not heard anything from Remington.
Had another who was having issues with his Walther, just got it back from repair and it still didn't work. No worries, he was on a waiting list (last year) to get an R51.
For a carry gun!!!
Just shook my head and wished him the best.

I hate being a guinea pig/beta tester any more, unless I have to be (need something that does not exist and will work with the vendor to make it happen).

[dragon813gt]

Remington has been saying "Next Quarter" on the 1894C for more than a year and a half...

Let me know when it actually happens...

They said the same things w/ the 44 Magnums as well. I'm not saying they will be made soon. When they are made be ready to plop your money down.

[JHeath]

I find it disheartening, if amusing that nobody in this thread has seen fit to repeat the timeless bit of wisdom which says,


"NEVER, EVER fly the "A" Model of anything!"
World War II Pilot Officer Edward Thompson of 433 (RCAF) Squadron.

Exactly. That kind of stupidity is how my grandfather and great-grandfather saddled me with these janky three-digit 1st Gen SAAs, 1886-made Winchesters, 1911 Colts from 1911, etc. If only they'd had the basic sense not to be beta-test guinea pigs for unproven designs. But NOOOO. So now I am stuck with a basement full of this junk and you guys get to shoot the good ones that have been wrung out and de-bugged.

[bedbugbilly]

The R51 certainly looked good in the beginning . . . but so did the Edsel and I knew the guy who designed that one! I was hyped up on the R51 when I first read the reports of the "prototype" and how nice it was. Hmmm . . . certainly hasn't panned out. I have lost all confidence in Remington . . . and unfortunately, it's an old company that can't stack up to what it was. Now when I hear "R51" . . .I ask myself how I could have let myself get so excited over it . . but that's human nature. Id want a handgun that "works" . . not one that "might work" . . . especially if it's going to be my CCW. Personally, I've "given up" on the R51. Remington has had more than enough time to "get it right" and from what I'm hearing, it's still "iffy". I normally carry a Smith Model 36 snub - but I was also looking for a decent 9mm to switch off to once in a while - that's one reason I was so interested in the R51. I'll pass on the "turkey" . . . waited long enough . . . next week I'm picking up a 9mm Shield.

[9.3X62AL]

Outpost's "A"-model advice is good info.

I'll bet that the Glock single-stack 9mm compact works all right.

[Tackleberry41]

Yes but glock really wasn't reinventing the wheel with their single stack. Simply scaled some parts differently.

There just seem to be alot of guns on the market where you wonder if they fired them at all in the time between when it was designed and put in a box. Where somebody would have said, whoa that doesn't work very good. And then somebody went and worked the bugs out. Somehow its cheaper to recall guns or repair them as they go along vs making them right to begin with. Its almost like the Simpsons episode where Homer volunteers for medical research, they give him a drug thats supposed to be for reducing your appetite, when it makes you blind. They would let marketing figure out something.

[Salmoneye]

They said the same things w/ the 44 Magnums as well. I'm not saying they will be made soon. When they are made be ready to plop your money down.

I was ready for more than a year to buy two for graduation...That was last month...

There is no way I will be one of the guinea pigs and buy the first batch that come off the yet to be created line...

[dtknowles]

It's so typical and regrettable that so many once great American companies today, seem to be so inept at producing good technically oriented products. I think a lot of it goes back to when Harvard Business School decided to advocate that the leaders of companies had no real NEED to know the technicalities of production, and only really needed to manage the money and the people. This seemed at the outset, to an old country boy and hobbiest gunsmith like me, to be ludicrous on the face of it, but then, I'm no Harvard MBA either. But since then, it seems some really highly touted MBA's from Harvard and other business schools that have followed that ethic and concept, have driven some fine and large American companies in the dirt. Einstein once said that if we just find the right question, the answers usually jump out at you as self-evident. Apparently, these Harvard MBA's couldn't find their butts with their hands tied behind their backs? And as Sonny and Cher sang, "The beat goes on." Some of them, at least, have had the simple common good sense to finally ASK someone who DOES know how to git-r-done, and let THEM handle the production part. Decrees from "on high" have done little but frustrate and dismay so many, many capable people who DO know how to get things done, and no matter how good an idea is, you've GOT to find someone who can answer the question "Now how do we go about making this a reality," and this just isn't something MBA's tend to be able to answer, and in far too many cases, they simply fail to recognize this little but relevant aspect of production that DOES make a HUGE difference in companies.

A life-long friend of mine works at Daniel Defense, and Marty Daniels, the proprietor, DOES know from MUCH exe what helps and hurts AR's, and he learned how to GET those things BEFORE he ever formed his company. And it's really going well, too, expanding and maybe adding a new product soon that will be high end, but superb if HE has anything to do with it. Marty's also a friend of my son's, and everyone who knows Marty (I don't really) says he's a first class person in EVERY regard. Now THAT is the type of CEO that "CAN DO," and gets things done. There's also the fact that if I ever got one of Marty's guns and it wasn't "right" in any way, he'd make it right by whatever means necessary and possible. THAT is the way to run a gun company!

The current Remington CEO does not have an MBA no less one from Harvard and the previous President and CEO had an MBA but not from Harvard.

You are also focusing on the wrong corporate officer, the COO is more responsible for production and quality than the CEO. The COO is Joseph B. Gross has been Chief Operating Officer of Remington Arms Co. Inc. since April 2009. Mr. Gross served as Chief Operating Officer at Freedom Group, Inc. since April 2009 and its Vice President of Manufacturing since January 2009. Mr. Gross served as Remington's Vice President of Firearms Manufacturing since February 2008 and as its Ilion Plant Manager from January 2006 to February 2008. Prior to joining Remington, Mr. Gross had been an employee of Moen, Inc. ...if you are looking for someone to point a finger at this would be the guy.

Tim

[JHeath]

There's a difference between buying a Model A pistol as your only means of defense, and simply buying one to shoot and see what makes it tick.

Would you carry an R51 after you put 1000 rounds through it without a stoppage?

Ok, now would you buy a new 1911 anything and rely on it without testing it?

Which is smarter or dumber?

Lots of guys on this forum buy known "losers" and even seek them out. Ross Rifle? Newton Rifle? Why own a clunky Bergman or Mars or 1912 Steyr since it will never be as good a carry pistol as a new Glock?

Why own a First Gen SAA when you can buy a Vaquero and have six shots plus a warranty?

The R51 is interesting. I never got to hold one -- have read it's enough bulkier than an old 51 to make it less interesting.

But 1911s are boring at this point. They've been perfected. When I bought a Gold Cup (at age 18!) there were no display cases full of tuned adjustable-sight 1911s. You could by a Colt or maybe an AMT. Now they're wall-to-wall. You can't count the number of factories honing that design.

It would have been great to see R resurrect the Model 53, had the 51 done respectably well. The Navy and Marine Corps actually preferred the 53 to the 1911 after testing.

But everybody's p__sing and moaning so much about the 51, determined not to give the thing a chance, that I wouldn't blame R for dropping it.

[Tackleberry41]

The stuff I read on the model 51 were just so glaring. Sights that fell out of the slides? Really nobody said anything, it would be pretty obvious. Or did they say something and were told screw it put it in a box. It sort of defies logic, its really hard to sell a pistol if the sights fall out from casual handling. Or ones that you couldn't even rack the slide on, again nobody said hey we have a whole pile of guns that don't even function. It is the sort of thing a person will do when buying a new gun. "Hmmm the slide won't come back, meh Ill buy it anyways?" said nobody ever. I doubt it was one individual. Just the mentality that is part of the way of doing things anymore. Remington probably got rid of anybody making decent money who knew how guns were supposed to work. And brought in a bunch of lower paid people because they will care just as much as someone making 2x the pay. Wal mart kind of people, low paid robots. On paper the project looked like a winner, the only thing wal street people concern themselves with. Their not hands on people, jsut how it looks on paper. What their bonus will be. And now that its blown up in their face, will be looking for scapegoats as it certainly cant be the way they run the business. CEOs are only responsible when things are going good, bad things thats underlings fault.

[ohland]

I used to work for a small shop, the owner knew EVERYTHING about the 1849-1872 Colt and Remington revolvers, he made Spencers, Sharps, etc... But what didn't help is trying to machine parts without drawings, except for the ones I made in my notebook. Tolerance stacking is definitely something to be wary of...

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/22/remington-r51-pistol-return-production/

"William said the problems that plagued the initial R51 release – including out of battery firings in some examples, and especially tight locking blocks in others – were the result of a tolerance stacking error. Even with today’s high-precision manufacturing techniques, every part of each individual gun is slightly different from the same part in the next gun, and to allow for the mass manufacture and assembly of weapons, each dimension of a part is held to a standard: No bigger than X, no smaller than Y. If enough parts are close enough to X than Y, or Y than X, an individual pistol can have what is called a “tolerance stacking” problem: The parts don’t fit right, and problems result.


According to William, this is what happened to the R51: The locking block that is the signature feature of the R51’s hesitation-locked design is a low-tolerance part – in other words, X and Y are very close together. This means that if the dimensions of these locking blocks are not controlled correctly, tolerance stacking can quickly result."

"Owners of the new R51 won’t notice much different than the old weapon; the new guns say “Huntsville, AL” on the side instead of “Charlotte, NC”, since Remington is closing the Charlotte plant, and moving all production to its facility in Huntsville. William is confident that Remington has put the time and work needed to solve the tolerance-stacking issue, and even with the blood, sweat, and tears (and four magazines!) that the new R51 comes with, he says the expected MSRP will be around $40"

UPDATE: I musta missed that last zero when cutting 'n pasting. MSRP will be around $400.

[rintinglen]

I'll risk 40 bucks:kidding:

[MtGun44]

President of Moen. . . . . . . OK. I wonder how many folks died because their faucet
wouldn't work when they needed it to?

Bill

[ohland]

President of Moen Bill

Stop or I'll spray you with pulsating water jets?