Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

Almost every review I saw online said that the R51 was a POS.

I just received my Gun Test magazine on Friday and was astonished that they rated it so high. They may have to eat some crow on this one.

Or give back the check...

carmen fovozzo wrote:Or give back the check...

Carmen, Gun Test buys the test firearms themselves, they don't use ones supplied as samples by the manufacturer, distributor, etc. Best I know the magazine isn't run in a manner to shill-for-pay. Perhaps they got hold of a non-lemon R51 by random chance.

I understand exactly how it works....it's like political contributions...you just don't have to declare it in this case....shill for pay....how can you know ?

Update: Remington replacing R51s:

http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/b ... on-models/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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.

My question is simply: Where was the quality control for the production models?

carmen fovozzo wrote:I understand exactly how it works....it's like political contributions...you just don't have to declare it in this case....shill for pay....how can you know ?

I figure in this day and age they would have been caught at it by now, Carmen. People in any industry tend to spout off about such behavior eventually.

Used to peruse Gun Tests pretty frequently and they never practiced any brand favoritism that I could catch. For example in one issue they might try out and give high marks to say a particular Beretta model. Few months later they might pan heck out of something else from the same company, if it didn't operate right during their testing.

Your store didn't get a bad review in Tile Tests magazine one time or something, did it? That might have caused you to become cynical...

I know how the BBB works and Angie's list...I know how manufactures work also...I deal with them everyday.....I will not pay for "kind" words for my business from anyone...maybe that's why I'm still the little guy...

S&W has to divvy up a bunch...they got caught...

Curzyk wrote:Update: Remington replacing R51s:

http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/b ... on-models/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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.

My question is simply: Where was the quality control for the production models?

I don't think it is a quality control problem. The grit and metal chips in mine were quality control but the problem as I see it is in the bottom of the slide and possibly the sear notch. As the slide moves rearward it forces the hammer to the rear until the sear catches.
From this point until the slide is almost back in battery there is no reason for the slide to contact the hammer. On the 51 it doesn't but on the R51 it drags almost the whole length sapping the energy from the slide.
They may have decided to leave this material to save machine time. This is the area I polished to get mine running decent.
The hammer profile could be changed..
The barrel should be faced to bottom out in the frame instead of resting on the pin.

MAJORSDAD13 wrote:Almost every review I saw online said that the R51 was a POS.

I just received my Gun Test magazine on Friday and was astonished that they rated it so high. They may have to eat some crow on this one.

Not given the disclaimers ...

It appears that Remington acknowledges that the R51 is very "ammo fussy," and that you should only use only Remington and Barnes ammo. From the Gun Tests article:

The mechanism depends on the timing and force of the pressure curve of the ammunition for proper operation.

Of course, they intentionally used other ammo, and they had problems. But they noted that, as long as they used the specified ammo, it was problem-free. They seemed to be satisfied with the ammo limitations listed in the user manual.

I don't like limitations such as those, but remember the basic rule: RTFM.

When the Kimber Solo came out they specified a ammo also...124gr or higher...for their break in period....and then after that...I did..and after that I used any kind of ammo..Including WWB 115gr......it shot anything I fed it....

If a gun will function on only a certain ammo IMO there is something wrong with the gun..

carmen fovozzo wrote:If a gun will function on only a certain ammo IMO there is something wrong with the gun..

I agree ... partially. There are reasonable limitations for everything. A lot of handgun manuals warn not to use +P ammo. Not long after I got my Ruger LCP, I bought some Underwood +P .380 ACP. I was going to put it my LCP, but I decided I had better check first. The Ruger manual basically said, "Don't you dare!" So I decided not to risk it, and I saved the Underwood for my FÉG PA-63 variant, which I know can handle it.

Werz wrote:

carmen fovozzo wrote:If a gun will function on only a certain ammo IMO there is something wrong with the gun..

I agree ... partially. There are reasonable limitations for everything. A lot of handgun manuals warn not to use +P ammo.

And at the other end of the scale, as I recall the Desert Eagle in both .357 and .44 magnum required loads on the warm and heavy side to properly cycle the action.

JustaShooter wrote:

Werz wrote:

carmen fovozzo wrote:If a gun will function on only a certain ammo IMO there is something wrong with the gun..

I agree ... partially. There are reasonable limitations for everything. A lot of handgun manuals warn not to use +P ammo.

And at the other end of the scale, as I recall the Desert Eagle in both .357 and .44 magnum required loads on the warm and heavy side to properly cycle the action.

I could see that. When you have a gas-operated action with a relatively short barrel, you need pressure to build fast.

JustaShooter wrote: And at the other end of the scale, as I recall the Desert Eagle in both .357 and .44 magnum required loads on the warm and heavy side to properly cycle the action.

Yes, that is true. And, unless you like fouling up the gas system entirely in a very short time, jacketed bullets are needed for the Desert Eagles.