Return of the Remington R51

Status
Not open for further replies.
I noticed that:

1)Yup, Remington appears to have sculpted the feed ramp a bit too much, leaving the case head unsupported (whole rear of the chamber looks loose on the brass, actually)
2)Failures to feed or eject seemed to occur almost exclusively on full magazines, implying spring pressure is an issue
3)Failures also seemed to happen during deliberate fire, rather than rapid strings, which makes me wonder if there's a psychosommatic thing going on with how the gun is being gripped
4)His man-paw is clearly too big for the gun :p

TCB
 
I noticed that:

1)Yup, Remington appears to have sculpted the feed ramp a bit too much, leaving the case head unsupported (whole rear of the chamber looks loose on the brass, actually)

He says all of his failures were with Tula as were all of his case bulges. Tula may be using .356 bullets with long shoulders, I don't know. But in the past, case bulges like that were consistent with failure to fully chamber the round. He had no such problems with Remington ammo and I never had a problem chambering Remington ammo. I know Tula ammo only by reputation, and would only run it if I were trying to see if a gun could run on garbage. I would think choosing it as the first box through a new gun is just asking for disappointment.

2)Failures to feed or eject seemed to occur almost exclusively on full magazines, implying spring pressure is an issue
3)Failures also seemed to happen during deliberate fire, rather than rapid strings, which makes me wonder if there's a psychosommatic thing going on with how the gun is being gripped
4)His man-paw is clearly too big for the gun :p

TCB

See above regarding Tula ammo. At least one of his commenters says Tula has the same failures in Glocks. Doesn't seem like a good choice to base a first impression on.

His hand was clearly taking some abuse so he may well have been unconsciously trying to avoid that by changing his grip on the 1st shot. Also, he may have been riding the slide when the got FTFs while trying to clear.
 
I'm just not seeing what this Remington pistol can do that my Makarov PM can't do nearly as well.

Except jam up all the time. :p
 
Oh Joy! I just found a new problem with my Gen2 I did not have with the Gen1. It may be part of the FTF failures RyeonHam was having.

With the slide locked back on an empty mag, pulling the trigger will release the hammer so that when the slide is released, it hangs on the uncocked hammer. This requires racking the slide again to cock the hammer. However, the slide will have moved far enough to start to feed the new round so it will appear to be a failure to feed as the round will be partially up the feed ramp.

Obviously the newly designed disconnector is not disconnecting when the slide is locked back.
:uhoh:
This is a potentially serious matter on a SD gun as you are very likely to pull the trigger on a locked slide.

I'll still be going to the range tomorrow but I will then probably be calling Remington and asking if I can still trade for an R1. or get a refund. :banghead: :fire::cuss:
 
Member barnbwt's excellent description of the first-gen disconnector is here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-750299.html

I wonder what the redesigned part looks like?
I haven't taken it apart to see, but while the old moved vertically guided by two pins in parallel slots, the new one pivots on the rear pin probably guided by the forward pin in an arced slot. (if that makes any sense).

Also, to reproduce the new "hammer follow" problem:

1) the slide must be locked on an empty mag

2) trigger must be pulled with slide locked

3) slide must be released using the slide stop, not by racking the slide, because...

4) grip safety must not be pressed while releasing the slide.

If the grip safety is pressed (safety OFF) while releasing the slide after pulling the trigger, the hammer does not follow.

If the grip safety is not pressed (safety ON) while releasing the slide, the hammer does follow.

In his update video a few months back. RyeonHam said that the word from ROC was that release was being delayed to get signoff on a redesigned part that if not approved, would require a redesign of the frame. The new disconnector I described would function in the old frame and I can see no external differences in the fames. between 1G and 2G. The Charlotte rollmark on the 2G frame further suggests that frames made and serialized in NC are still being used and have not changed between generations. It appears to me that the only changes in the frame components are the disconnector and the new plastic trigger.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what the redesigned part looks like?
It's a pair of long, arch-shaped arms that appear to pivot at the very rear of the gun. Before it was rounded nub that went straight downward (so the front-side contact surface is still actuated by the slide similarly). The issue it sounds like is happening, is that the uneven underside of the slide/bolt assembly (since there are multiple parts in there, rather than a single milled trench like in most handguns) sits such that the disconnector is not pressed down when the slide is locked back.

Shoulda gone with the design I proposed that acted on a notch in the otherwise-continuous slide rails, Remington...:rolleyes:

It was worth trying it this way; very little rework or redesign to get the system they have, from what I can tell; just two slitting-saw notches added to the machining of the FCG pocket for the disconnector arms.

TCB
 
Last edited:
If the grip safety is pressed (safety OFF) while releasing the slide after pulling the trigger, the hammer does not follow.

If the grip safety is not pressed (safety ON) while releasing the slide, the hammer does follow.
Sheesh, between you and Ham, what is it with all these people than can't operate a giant-ass grip safety? (just ribbing you ;))

The grip safety internally slides a safety block along vertical guides, very much like the old disconnector; I forget what if any impact it has on the disconnector function. I think that along the vertical direction, there is no direct interaction, but I also know the safety blocks the trigger bar from moving rearward when active, and that trigger bar is attached to the disconnector, so...maybe depressing the safety drives that internal block down, and allows the returning slide to drive the disconnector down a wee bit farther or against a wee bit less force, to fully disengage the trigger bar (thus allowing the sear to re-seat in the hammer before it follows the slide).

It's clear that the trigger just isn't disconnecting by the motion of the slide back into battery, possibly because the far-gentler arc on the disconnector's rear does not impart as much force or momentum to the parts below. Disconnector design is a tricky thing, since as I've said before, you are basically harnessing very powerful recoil forces to operate very delicate trigger parts by moving them in tiny, precise increments. This is why I think trying to have any disconnector design ride the bumpy road that is the bottom of the bolt/slide assy is asking for trouble; besides imparting a 'notchy' feel to the action, you are alternately engaging & disengaging the trigger during the cycle (three times each way on the old style, if memory serves --no wonder my disco 'ears' are already getting worn down)

Just keep a firm grip on the handle with your three fingers while doing anything with the gun :rolleyes:

TCB
 
Yes, if you rack the slide after it locks back, your strong hand is still firmly gripping and depressing the safety. If you have to shift your grip to reach the slide release, with either the thumb of the right hand or the index finger of the left hand, you are much more likely to release the grip safety and get the hammer follow and subsequent lock up.

So ignoring the slide release and always racking the slide to chamber a round is a required habit.
 
Yeah, good thing Remington machined the slide catch on my gun so poorly that your thumb has to cam the whole slide back a full .01" to release, making the 'thumb operation' impossible :D (I'd fix it, but I learned handgunning on a CZ52, so I'm actually more likely to grind away the thumb-pad & make the gun narrower :rolleyes:)

TCB
 
I will not be taking the new R51 to the range. On at least two occasions while dry firing for function check, the disconnector failed to disconnect with the slide out of battery. By out of battery, I mean the bolt had cammed or was camming over the slide block. I don't have a lot of faith in this new disconnector design.
 
The video about the short disconnector pin is VERY disturbing!! How in the heck can someone sit there and install that pin without saying something about it? If Remington is serious about 'Quality'...they need to make an issue about it. Track down the person who installed it and either retrain or retire them...unless that's the pin the print calls out in which case the person who signed off on the print needs taken out back and beaten with it.

Considering that the first batch of re-released guns would likely be inspected with a magnifier and the whole reputation of the Company is riding on them....it's just inexcusable that they've done this poorly. His complaints about the ramps galling is just as incredible! That looks to me like the surface is indenting rather than galling and sure looks like it's way too soft for what it's being required to do.

Part of me inside is jumping up and down yelling 'Told you so!' while the other part is very sad that they're not looking like they've got things worked out successfully. Who the heck is in charge of that program and what kind of idiot are they?
 
Of course, I haven't fired mine, but after extensive hand cycling, what I see on my bolt is just wear polish. I see no signs of actual galling (which I did see on my Gen1) or indenting, just a bright streak on the plated surface. And what I see on my bolt looks like what I see in the video.

As to the disconnector pins, other users have reported having roll pins. Rye's is solid, Almost makes me wonder if his is a slave pin that didn't get replaced by the spec'd roll pin. Except, mine appears to be solid as well, but mine won't budge under manual pressure on a punch. I think it may be a little longer than his. It does extend into both sides of the frame, but just barely.
 
Yes, the 2G has the same rollmarks in the same locations as the 1G:
"REMINGTON ARMS CO. CHARLOTTE, NC R51"

Maybe they are using 1G frames that were already fully fabricated in NC with some additional finish work? After all, ATF considers the part with the S# to be the gun and everything else is just parts.

Too much is being read into this. For years, FN pistols have been rollmarked "Frederickburg, VA" when in fact they have been made in Columbia, SC.
 
Too much is being read into this. For years, FN pistols have been rollmarked "Frederickburg, VA" when in fact they have been made in Columbia, SC.
Still, the only apparent difference in the frames is the 2G has a hole drilled through at the rear of the rails for the pin that secures the new disconnector and ejector and the locking lug is heavily nitrided or anodized. Reportedly, the big hold up was finding a working design for the disconnector that would not require a major redesign of the frame. Looks like they succeeded, if it would just work. :uhoh:
 
Last edited:
That looks to me like the surface is indenting rather than galling and sure looks like it's way too soft for what it's being required to do.

The problem is Remington still is not properly contouring the slide cams, or at least not consistently. When the bolt is first struck by the cams, the flat faces of the contact surfaces are not parallel, so a sharp corner where the cam ends is what strikes hardest, then scrapes along the bolt cam surface removing metal until fully mating when the bolt is raised. Because the bolt is being driven back under some measure of force during the initial camming, this results in galling, tearing, or even cutting (in my case) of the softer bolt metal by the hard-nitrided slide.

I personally think a simple hardened pin through each side the slide would be a better cam surface at this point. Even better would be a pin through the slide that rides along a slot through the bolt, but disassembly would be harder. The best solution would be a link-based version that does away with sliding cam surfaces altogether (see the Browning BAR or M240 turned upside down)

TCB
 
What we need is a (one or more the merrier) reliable independent sources to test the "new" R51 intensively, and report their results before any of us consider buying one.
 
What we need is a (one or more the merrier) reliable independent sources to test the "new" R51 intensively, and report their results before any of us consider buying one.
Considering the negative experiences most reviewers had with the 1st Generation, there may not be many unbiased reviewers out there. :uhoh:
 
Considering the negative experiences most reviewers had with the 1st Generation, there may not be many unbiased reviewers out there.
Like "trust but verify," only without the trust :p

TCB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top