420Stainless
Member
I like the way it looks. I'm more into pocket carry and I don't think it would work well for me, but if I was looking for a light belt gun it would definitely be on the top of the list to check out.
New Remington R51 - 3913 killer?
- Thread starter HeavyDuty
- Start date
- Status
bigfatdave
Member
I sort of like it.
It's thin
It's in 9mm and rated for +p (so it's overbuilt for regular loads)
It's got a grip safety
It's got good sights
MSRP isn't too painful - how much will spare mags be?
I like MikeJammin's quick shoop as well, the wavy line is goofy. The grip panels are goofy, too.
I like the rear serrations on the slide, I like the overall lines, mostly.
What's the deal with the bump on the frontstrap's bottom corner? It's sort of Savage 1907-esqe, rather than Rem 51.
And I need a beat-up shooter-grade .32acp Rem51 for my "century of .32acp" display.
- I don't think I've ever seen one in the wild.
It's thin
It's in 9mm and rated for +p (so it's overbuilt for regular loads)
It's got a grip safety
It's got good sights
MSRP isn't too painful - how much will spare mags be?
I like MikeJammin's quick shoop as well, the wavy line is goofy. The grip panels are goofy, too.
I like the rear serrations on the slide, I like the overall lines, mostly.
What's the deal with the bump on the frontstrap's bottom corner? It's sort of Savage 1907-esqe, rather than Rem 51.
And I need a beat-up shooter-grade .32acp Rem51 for my "century of .32acp" display.
- I don't think I've ever seen one in the wild.
Tommygunn
Member
I agree! This is a great looking pistol at a great price! I want one!I guess beauty's in the eye of the beholder because when I looked at this thing I thought it was one of the best looking pistols I'd seen in a long, long time. It has an almost svelt appearance. Classy, graceful, and elegant.
At the suggested MRSP (and street prices are usually about 15-20% lower than MSRP) all I can say is "Shut up and take my money!".
Now ... how do I get the drool off my keyboard ..... ? ? ? ? ? ?
bigfatdave
Member
Indeed
Nom de Forum
Member
I like the way it looks.
The weight and thickness is good.
I like the lack of a thumb safety.
It is good to see a company make a "Back to the Future" move that does not involve another cloning of the 1911.
I hope the reliability and durability matches the competition. Time will tell.
The weight and thickness is good.
I like the lack of a thumb safety.
It is good to see a company make a "Back to the Future" move that does not involve another cloning of the 1911.
I hope the reliability and durability matches the competition. Time will tell.
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
A part of me . . . KINDA has to wonder why it is only being sold for that amount. Seems "too low", . . . but maybe I'm not familiar with how a company prices such things.
Anyway, it may very well be an option for those who prefer metal over polymer. Would I trade out my Shield for one? Probably not. I MAY buy one and if it turns out to be a nicer gun [and gets carried more], the Shield may go [or be sent to "hidden in car" duty].
Anyway, it may very well be an option for those who prefer metal over polymer. Would I trade out my Shield for one? Probably not. I MAY buy one and if it turns out to be a nicer gun [and gets carried more], the Shield may go [or be sent to "hidden in car" duty].
If you look at how it operates it is not straight blowback:
It has a locking breach block. The block contacts a groove or "shoulder" which cams it upward and brings the block into contact with the slide, putting upward pressure on the block with the slide.
.
Last edited:
Jim Watson
Member
Hatcher reported that the 1917 Remington PA53 .45 Navy was a soft gun to shoot, relative to even a 1911. Much less sharp recoil than a Savage .45.
The trigger looks like a finger pincher, but that is my only fault with the appearance.
If they don't make the trigger pull heavy as a counterbalance to the lack of a thumb safety, it will be a good shooter.
The trigger looks like a finger pincher, but that is my only fault with the appearance.
If they don't make the trigger pull heavy as a counterbalance to the lack of a thumb safety, it will be a good shooter.
Dan Wesson ECO.
Jim PHL
Member
My 3913 is safe
9mmfan
Member
I'm torn. Would want to hold one in person to make up my mind, though I'm leaning towards liking it.
It's also raising my hopes that someone will offer up a clone of the 1903/1908. Maybe in 9MM. Also at this price point.
Maybe unlikely, but a brother can dream.
It's also raising my hopes that someone will offer up a clone of the 1903/1908. Maybe in 9MM. Also at this price point.
Maybe unlikely, but a brother can dream.
Very close to the Ruger LC9:
Ruger LC9
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 3.12 in
Length: 6.0 in
Height: 4.5 in
Slide Width: .90in
Weight: 17.10 oz
Capacity: 7+1
Remington R-51
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 3.4 in
Length: 6.0 in
Height: 4.5 in
Width: .96in
Weight: 20.0 oz
Capacity: 7+1
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
It's interesting that they omitted the thumb safety. The original model 51 had a thumb safety, but Remington advertised that the weapon was safe to carry with the thumb safety disengaged, but provided it for those who wanted an extra measure of safety. Whenever I've carried the thing, I've never carried it with the thumb safety engaged -- that lever is tiny, and needs a down-and-forward motion to wipe off, not at all like the very intuitive, natural, simple downward wipe of the shooting hand thumb on a 1911. I'm not at all confident I could do it under the stress of an actual gunfight.
I am very interested in this new pistol. I've always loved my Model 51, and I would give a kidney if Remington would produce the Model 53 prototype that the Navy and Marine Corps tested, and almost adopted just prior to WWI.
It's interesting to note the the Model 53 prototype had, at the request of the Marines, not only no manual safety, but the grip safety pinned down. Their reasoning was a follows:
I don't agree with all of their reasoning here, but it makes for interesting reading. And it looks like Remington has decided no thumb safety is needed for what is, essentially, a single action pistol. Frankly that amazes me in today's overly litigious, liability-conscious society.
It's almost the exact same size as the Ruger LC9, and the engineer from Remington said more calibers are to follow.
So it is kind of funny that Glock comes out with a 380 ACP the size of the LC9, and Remington comes out with a 9mm pistol the size of the LC9.
Remington will probably chamber this in 380 ACP eventually, which would make it the same size as the Glock 42, but with a grip safety and crisp SA trigger. And maybe by then Glock will have a single stack 9mm the size of the LC9?
That's why I say
Remington 1
Glock 0
So it is kind of funny that Glock comes out with a 380 ACP the size of the LC9, and Remington comes out with a 9mm pistol the size of the LC9.
Remington will probably chamber this in 380 ACP eventually, which would make it the same size as the Glock 42, but with a grip safety and crisp SA trigger. And maybe by then Glock will have a single stack 9mm the size of the LC9?
That's why I say
Remington 1
Glock 0
verdun59
Member
Very interesting and I'd jump on it in a heartbeat if it wasn't a blowback, because I've never met a blowback that I liked. However this looks so enticing I may just have to give it a try, because I really need more guns.
As an aside where are the hundreds, no thousands of those who would never in their lifetime and that of their children buy a gun with a grip safety like the dreaded high bore axis XD.
As an aside where are the hundreds, no thousands of those who would never in their lifetime and that of their children buy a gun with a grip safety like the dreaded high bore axis XD.
bigfatdave
Member
I'd buy that gun. As I've informed Armscor multiple times.
Maybe it is time to ping on Colt about it.
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
It's not a blowback. Look at the video of its operation someone posted earlier in this thread. It's kind of a delayed blowback, but not really. It's kind of a locked breech, but not really. It's a hybrid of the two. Its mechanism is unique, and no other guns besides the autoloaders Pedersen designed for Remington ever used it. When you fire, the internal breech block recoils about the same distance as the thickness of a cartridge rim. Then it butts up against a shoulder in the frame, but that slight movement it made backward is enough to impart all its backward momentum to the slide (kind of like those swinging ball desk toys -- when the ball hits the rest of the hanging steel balls, it stops, but the force of its fall is transmitted through the stationary balls and causes the one on the opposite end to swing). As the slide travels to the rear, it cams the breech block upward, unlocking it, and allowing the breech to open, and the case to eject only after chamber pressure has dropped to a safe level.
9mmfan
Member
bigfatdave said:
Yessir, but that would dash my hopes on the whole price point issue. I don't know that Colt could produce new ones for less than you can find worn old ones.
Granted, there would likely be updates and "improvements." Their legal department would undoubtedly require it, not that this necessarily a bad thing, but that with the Rampant Pony would most certainly equal $$$. They would probably sell, but I wouldn't be able to afford one for a while.
Again, just dreamin'.
bigfatdave
Member
And that's why I've been pinging Armscor about it. In .32acp, with modern production mags compatible with the imagined copy and originals, if at all possible (Metalform, probably)
Armscor remains a small operation, largely directed by one family. The CEO of the US end of Armscor maintains an active presence on Facebook, and as odious as facebook is, you can ask a question there and get an answer from the CEO, the service/gunsmith guys, or Customer Service. Plus other fans chime in with helpful, amusing, or envy-inducing info.
Perhaps, 9mmfan, someone else adding in over there would help?
===
Sorry for thread derailment - back to the Rem-51!
Why aren't they offering it in .32acp or a modern cartridge in the spirit of .32acp?
Dammit, I want a gun that shoots a .30carbine case, trimmed-down to somewhere between 9x19 and .45acp length, with a hot load and nasty little .30"/7.6?mm projectiles. You could stuff a LOT of them into a mag, recoil would be minimal, a bunch would fit in a mag, it wouldn't have to worry about being compatible with antique guns the way .32acp, 9x19, .45acp, and all the other legacy cartridges do, a doublestack mag would be slim and hold a lot of rounds, and lastly, a normal-sized mag would hold a whole bunch of them.
Remington, I challenge you to produce this new Remington51 AND your 1911 clones in the new revolutionary .33BFD cartridge! I don't even want royalties, just two of each model and enough ammo to wear the guns out with!
Someone get on this, we can get a savage bolt-action rifle into production in a week, as well as rifle & pistol T/C barrels in a few months. Masterpiece arms will get right on not selling their odd-looking guns in .33BFD, while Remington makes all the profit.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
