Looks like the R51 is a bust. Can't say this surprises me. - Page 5

Laz · February 20, 2014, 07:21 PM

Initially, I had great interest in the R51, to the point of nearly, nearly, ordering one sight unseen. Restraint has proven wise, I think, as more information comes out. The initial outrageously low MSRP has crept up but that is to be expeicted. It is still quite low. The dimensions of the pistol are larger than I first assumed and seem to be rising with the MSRP. My biggest concern, however, is the lack of information regarding the inner workings, particularly the grip safety. Jeff Quinn in his Gunblast article writes, "The R51 has a grip safety that blocks movement of the trigger until pressed." I want to know what blocks the internal and unseen and unreachable cocked hammer that exists whenever a round is chambered. Something that blocks movement of the trigger is fine but what prevents the hammer from falling if the sear would slip or break? Am I needlessly concerned? Glock striker fired pistols have a firing pin block preventing the firing pin from moving forward on its own. I have read nothing about the R51's safety features other than the trigger-blocking grip safety. I want to know more before even considering one. I just purchased a Sig P290RS which IMO, feature and size wise, beats the R51 across the board, assuming it proves reliable.

barnbwt · February 20, 2014, 07:48 PM

Ya'll do realize that the initial measurements weren't supplied by Remington, but by some hack writer who tossed out approximate numbers offhand, right? As stupid as it was for Big Green to not bother with dispensing the actual numbers (as if they didn't know them

) and let the inaccurate ones percolate, it's a bit specious to claim they were actively misleading people. Remington has been playing the online rumor game incredibly stupidly, and letting writers and random guys on the internet rule the debate without contradiction --very unwise for a company lacking a rep. But let's not pretend it's all some master plan to trick us into buying the pistol that wouldn't obviously backfire long before the guns were released; Remington knows that the inaccurate measurements hurt them badly here.

Regarding the internal workings, I would have to guess they are incredibly similar to the original guns. From what I can tell, very little was changed from the Model 51 other than machinability improvements, and all external indicators and takedown info suggests the guts are the same. Which is ultimately why I'm not too worried about this being a dud of a gun; at worst it'll be like that run of the mill 1911 that needs tweaking and tuning to run right, except it won't cost 1000$ off the bat

If these sell initially below MSRP like people are expecting given the demand being seen, it will be a miracle.

"I trust Quinn's honesty. I have read before that he often refuses to even put up reviews if he doesn't think the gun is of decent quality. He also doesn't gloss over issues (others mentioned that he noted the handful of failures). He's just a guy who seems to genuinely enjoy guns and tends to like the ones he chooses to review. That's a pretty refreshing break from the heavy-duty cynicism on most gun boards."
He tends to color things in a nice light, but I personally think that is more because little things tend to not bother him (both hyper and hypo sensitive critics are a bad thing). All critics self censor, and that's why we're skeptical of movies that aren't shown before hitting theaters. That's why many at SHOT became skeptical when the gun wasn't present. But when people actual get the gun and are writing reviews on it, and they are largely positive (even Nick's review is largely positive despite the highly-conflicted "C" he tossed up at the end), the grain of salt gets smaller.

TTAG's stance makes sense, because they pose as a blog; negativity sells blog views from threads fanning the 'outrage.' Quinn's a magazine man; magazines thrive on positivity since that keeps people interested through the various articles (and ads)

So far we know:
-The trigger isn't as nice as a 1911 (were we really expecting this, though?)
-The gun's bigger than some non-Remington guy said
-The gun's too small for a big-man-paw* though the grip is longer

-The return spring is incredibly light
-The takedown is "different" --not notably harder, but different
-The finish isn't as pretty as initially thought (this is Remington, though)
-The gun costs marginally more than two Hi-Points rather than the same
-Recoil is universally said to be very mild, but the grip shape may not be ideal for all
-The gun looks nicer** than anything close to cost-competitive

TCB
*Anyone notice the gap between the pistol tail and Quinn's hand, as opposed to Leghorn's web slid up over the tip to flush with the slide?

Is Quinn's hand that much smaller?
**Nicer meaning attention paid to aesthetic design features --whether you like them or not-- and effort given to designing the gun to its purpose. The swoopy curves and thorough de-horning are indisputably more effort than any other compact pistol maker is putting out these days (but maybe Rem should have focused on fit/finish quality more)

KyJim · February 20, 2014, 08:50 PM

The 4.1 trigger pull (per Quinn) surprised me. Maybe it won't be 1911ish crisp but a decently clean 4 to 5 pound pull would be great.

Pilot · February 21, 2014, 07:46 AM

I handled one in person at the Outdoor show in Harrisburg, PA. For the money, I thought it was fine for its purposes. I will wait to make up my mind until I shoot one, and put rounds down range.

zincwarrior · February 21, 2014, 09:44 AM

A 1.5 inch spread at 25 yards, and a 4.1lb trigger pull? Did I read that right?

Holy frijole Batman.

I'm just glad they don't have a double column else I'd be really annoyed with all the plastic guns I acquired.

sakata8242 · February 22, 2014, 12:05 AM

It just doesn't seem all that interesting, other than it's based off an old/classic/antique/whatever you want to call it design. Single stack 9mm subcompact? Saturated market and there are other options that have established track records. I still suspect it will sell reasonably well, but most likely to people who aren't shooters. Uncle Ed might buy one, shoot a couple mags through it, carry it every now and again, but that's about it. Hopefully Remington can make their money back before Glock releases its single stack 9.

KyJim · February 22, 2014, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Single stack 9mm subcompact? Saturated market and there are other options that have established track records.

Actually, it's not a saturated market. You are leaving out the fact it is single action. Other than 1911s, there's not a lot out there like that. Glock's not going to make one.

sakata8242 · February 22, 2014, 01:16 AM

Not saturated because it's SA? Give me a break, now you're just splitting hairs. Not to mention the trigger pull will be likely be ridiculously heavy for a SA because of the intended target audience of the pistol. The fact is the market is saturated with single stack 9mm pocket guns

Ruger LC9?
Springfield XDS?
Keltec PF9?
Taurus PT709?
Kimber Solo?
M&P Shield?
Boberg XR9?
Beretta Nano?
Kahr CW9, PM9, CM9?
SIG P290?
Walther PPS?
SIG P938?
SIG P239? (Granted that's pushing the subcompact category, but it's still a single stack 9mm)

All. Single. Stack. 9mm. If that's not saturated then I'd like to know what is.

And what makes you so sure Glock won't make a single stack 9? Are you privy to information directly from them? Because the only difference between a 9x19 single stack Glock and the Glock 42 is essentially a slightly longer grip to accommodate the longer 9x19 cartridge and a heavier recoil spring. There is no way they're missing out on the party, even if they are a few years late.

JimmyR · February 22, 2014, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakata

Not saturated? Where have you been the last few years? You do realize they make guns other than 1911s, right?

Perhaps you've heard of the following?

Ruger LC9?
Springfield XDS?
Keltec PF9?
Taurus PT709?
Kimber Solo?
M&P Shield?
Boberg XR9?
Beretta Nano?
Kahr CW9, PM9, CM9?
SIG P290?
Walther PPS?
SIG P938?
SIG P239? (Granted that's pushing the subcompact category, but it's still a single stack 9mm)

All. Single. Stack. 9mm. If that's not saturated then I'd like to know what is.

And what makes you so sure Glock won't make a single stack 9? Are you privy to information directly from them? Because the only difference between a 9x19 single stack Glock and the Glock 42 is essentially a slightly longer grip to accommodate the longer 9x19 cartridge and a heavier recoil spring. There is no way they're missing out on the party, even if they are a few years late.

Sakata, the point Jim is making is that, while there are many single stack 9mm weapons out there, the number of single action only single stack options are much more limited, which puts the new Remington in a different class altogether.

sakata8242 · February 22, 2014, 01:35 AM

I realize that, post clarified to reflect that.

And as I mentioned above, that distinction is not a particularly good one, since the trigger on it is likely to be heavier and worse than the striker fired offerings listed above because of the target market the pistol is intended for. 7 pound "SA" trigger anyone? Even some of the DAO offerings like the Kahr PM9 have better triggers compared to the SA only SIG P938.

It also doesn't change my opinion of the gun -- that it isn't all that interesting, or better. It's just new. And I'm sure it will sell reasonably well, if for no other reason for that fact and that it's a Remington. But again, I don't predict it to be any kind of a game changer in the market.

Sparks1957 · February 22, 2014, 05:41 AM

Quote:

7 pound "SA" trigger anyone?

Where did you hear that 7-pound figure? All I've heard from reputable sources is 4-4.5 pounds. Sounds like you've made up your mind not to like it. Contempt prior to investigation is difficult to persuade otherwise.

Pond, James Pond · February 22, 2014, 07:47 AM

I still like it despite some reviews and I enjoyed the gunblast video.

Regrettably though, I don't expect to ever see one in the flesh here!

gc70 · February 22, 2014, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakata8242

It also doesn't change my opinion of the gun -- that it isn't all that interesting, or better. It's just new.

A lot of people don't recognize the significance of the difference in the R51's design, probably because the part of the R51 that is different is relatively small - only about the width of a pinkie finger. But that difference lies at the heart of shootability, which is probably the most critical factor in a CCW design.

Uncle Malice · February 22, 2014, 09:32 AM

Quote:

7 pound "SA" trigger anyone?

What in the world are you talking about??

Have you read either of the reviews posted here? ...or any of the documentation on the gun?

I don't really have much interest in it - mostly because I'm not a Remington fan... but at least I get the info before making silly claims.

chris in va · February 22, 2014, 03:47 PM

I just wish people would stop referring to the R51 as a 'subcompact' or 'pocket' gun. It's actually larger than my Kahr K9 and closer to my CZ P01 in size.

pat701 · February 22, 2014, 05:01 PM

I am shocked!!!!!

gc70 · February 22, 2014, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris in va

I just wish people would stop referring to the R51 as a 'subcompact' or 'pocket' gun. It's actually larger than my Kahr K9 and closer to my CZ P01 in size.

Manufacturers generally label guns in the R51 size range as 'subcompact' - for instance, the CZ RAMI, which is the same length and slightly taller.

I never could figure out exactly what size a 'pocket' gun is supposed to be because I don't know the size of a person's pockets.

KyJim · February 23, 2014, 02:27 AM

Gunblast measured the trigger at 4.1 pounds. One of the reasons I have not purchased a Sig 938 is the trigger. I am hopeful all the R51s are in the 4 to 5 pound range. I'm a 1911 guy most of the time so have a trigger pull which is consistent with a 1911 is a plus. I also like the size of the R51 for a belt gun.

Hawg · February 23, 2014, 10:28 AM

I don't like it. I think its butt ugly but it is way too early to say its a bust. It might turn out to be the most popular thing since sliced bread.

**Mike Irwin** · February 23, 2014, 10:45 AM

" I have read before that he often refuses to even put up reviews if he doesn't think the gun is of decent quality."

This is how American Rifleman operated when I was with the organization.

If a gun didn't meet some basic quality standards (and a lot did NOT), they never made it into the pages of the magazine.

g527 · February 23, 2014, 10:55 AM

Hi, I am new here but not to guns. Have any of you that don't like the R 51 seen the ramworks.net site by Richard Mann ? He reviews it, shoots it ,takes it apart & puts it back together with no trouble. His young son takes it apart in 17 seconds & puts it together in 29 seconds. He also likes the gun very much.

He has a background & experience in guns that will rival anyone. He also is a writer for Shooting Illustrated. He has written gun and bullet books too. His review blows that TTAG review by Nick Leghorn out of the water.I thought that review by TTAG on the R 51 was terrible. He starts out loving the gun & turns around & bashes it. He got slide bite from it.I have been shooting PPK's for over 50 years & have never gotten slide bite. They are the worst biters around.

I am sure the size of Leghorns hand, huge, had something to do with it. I am buying the R 51 as I need it for the easy slide rack & recoil. That alone would sell me on it.

btmj · February 23, 2014, 11:01 AM

And the winner of this thread is.... Barnbwt

Quote:

So far we know:
-The trigger isn't as nice as a 1911 (were we really expecting this, though?)
-The gun's bigger than some non-Remington guy said
-The gun's too small for a big-man-paw* though the grip is longer
-The return spring is incredibly light
-The takedown is "different" --not notably harder, but different
-The finish isn't as pretty as initially thought (this is Remington, though)
-The gun costs marginally more than two Hi-Points rather than the same
-Recoil is universally said to be very mild, but the grip shape may not be ideal for all
-The gun looks nicer** than anything close to cost-competitive

This review of "what is known" sums up the situation very nicely, and puts it all into perspective.

Jim

Sparks1957 · February 23, 2014, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Hi, I am new here but not to guns. Have any of you that don't like the R 51 seen the ramworks.net site by Richard Mann ? He reviews it, shoots it ,takes it apart & puts it back together with no trouble

Welcome to the Firing Line, and thanks for pointing out that review... a good, seemingly unbiased look at the gun.

jimbob86 · February 24, 2014, 03:00 AM

While I am interested in the gun, and love it on paper ....... Am I the only one that noticed the healing slide bite wound on Mr. Quinn's hand?

My hands are decidedly leaner and smaller than most ..... I doubt I'd have that problem...... YMMV.

WardenWolf · February 24, 2014, 05:05 AM

Looking at the design of the gun, it made me wonder how he managed to get slide bite out of that. It has as very deep grip shelf to keep your hand from riding up. Then I saw the video, and realized he was gripping it entirely wrong. I have a similarly-sized pistol, a Polish P-64. You need to firmly grip it so the webbing of your hand is fully under the shelf. He was fat-handing it in a very awkward way rather than allowing the piece to properly sit in his hand. He basically had to TRY for this to happen, and that's exactly what he did. If you look, the pistol is actually turned slightly to the left in his grip rather than being pointed straight out.

So, I'm going to call the slide bite 100% bogus.

Now, let's move on to the recoil: yes, recoil in a pistol like this is going to be rather nasty. The low bore axis means it's recoiling directly into the webbing of your hand. You need to be gripping it tightly or it's going to hurt. It's just like holding a stock to your shoulder: if you don't hold it tightly, and in the right spot, it will hurt a LOT more.

As for grips, you'll notice the grip panels are removable. I'm sure someone will come up with different grip styles for it. However, the grip safety design will cause problems for a wraparound grip.

The only truly damning thing, if true, is the reassembly issue. If the problem really does not always show up immediately, but rather an unpredictable number of rounds in the future, that is a major risk. If you don't know about this, or aren't careful, this could get you killed.

February 20, 2014, 07:21 PM	#101
Laz Senior Member Join Date: November 12, 1999 Posts: 1,278	Initially, I had great interest in the R51, to the point of nearly, nearly, ordering one sight unseen. Restraint has proven wise, I think, as more information comes out. The initial outrageously low MSRP has crept up but that is to be expeicted. It is still quite low. The dimensions of the pistol are larger than I first assumed and seem to be rising with the MSRP. My biggest concern, however, is the lack of information regarding the inner workings, particularly the grip safety. Jeff Quinn in his Gunblast article writes, "The R51 has a grip safety that blocks movement of the trigger until pressed." I want to know what blocks the internal and unseen and unreachable cocked hammer that exists whenever a round is chambered. Something that blocks movement of the trigger is fine but what prevents the hammer from falling if the sear would slip or break? Am I needlessly concerned? Glock striker fired pistols have a firing pin block preventing the firing pin from moving forward on its own. I have read nothing about the R51's safety features other than the trigger-blocking grip safety. I want to know more before even considering one. I just purchased a Sig P290RS which IMO, feature and size wise, beats the R51 across the board, assuming it proves reliable. __________________ Laz I’m just a nobody, trying to tell everybody, about Somebody, who can save anybody.

February 20, 2014, 07:48 PM	#102
barnbwt Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Posts: 1,085	Ya'll do realize that the initial measurements weren't supplied by Remington, but by some hack writer who tossed out approximate numbers offhand, right? As stupid as it was for Big Green to not bother with dispensing the actual numbers (as if they didn't know them ) and let the inaccurate ones percolate, it's a bit specious to claim they were actively misleading people. Remington has been playing the online rumor game incredibly stupidly, and letting writers and random guys on the internet rule the debate without contradiction --very unwise for a company lacking a rep. But let's not pretend it's all some master plan to trick us into buying the pistol that wouldn't obviously backfire long before the guns were released; Remington knows that the inaccurate measurements hurt them badly here. Regarding the internal workings, I would have to guess they are incredibly similar to the original guns. From what I can tell, very little was changed from the Model 51 other than machinability improvements, and all external indicators and takedown info suggests the guts are the same. Which is ultimately why I'm not too worried about this being a dud of a gun; at worst it'll be like that run of the mill 1911 that needs tweaking and tuning to run right, except it won't cost 1000$ off the bat If these sell initially below MSRP like people are expecting given the demand being seen, it will be a miracle. "I trust Quinn's honesty. I have read before that he often refuses to even put up reviews if he doesn't think the gun is of decent quality. He also doesn't gloss over issues (others mentioned that he noted the handful of failures). He's just a guy who seems to genuinely enjoy guns and tends to like the ones he chooses to review. That's a pretty refreshing break from the heavy-duty cynicism on most gun boards." He tends to color things in a nice light, but I personally think that is more because little things tend to not bother him (both hyper and hypo sensitive critics are a bad thing). All critics self censor, and that's why we're skeptical of movies that aren't shown before hitting theaters. That's why many at SHOT became skeptical when the gun wasn't present. But when people actual get the gun and are writing reviews on it, and they are largely positive (even Nick's review is largely positive despite the highly-conflicted "C" he tossed up at the end), the grain of salt gets smaller. TTAG's stance makes sense, because they pose as a blog; negativity sells blog views from threads fanning the 'outrage.' Quinn's a magazine man; magazines thrive on positivity since that keeps people interested through the various articles (and ads) So far we know: -The trigger isn't as nice as a 1911 (were we really expecting this, though?) -The gun's bigger than some non-Remington guy said -The gun's too small for a big-man-paw* though the grip is longer -The return spring is incredibly light -The takedown is "different" --not notably harder, but different -The finish isn't as pretty as initially thought (this is Remington, though) -The gun costs marginally more than two Hi-Points rather than the same -Recoil is universally said to be very mild, but the grip shape may not be ideal for all -The gun looks nicer** than anything close to cost-competitive TCB Anyone notice the gap* between the pistol tail and Quinn's hand, as opposed to Leghorn's web slid up over the tip to flush with the slide? Is Quinn's hand that much smaller? *Nicer meaning attention paid to aesthetic design features --whether you like them or not-- and effort given to designing the gun to its purpose. The swoopy curves and thorough de-horning are indisputably more effort than any other compact pistol maker is putting out these days (but maybe Rem should have focused on fit/finish quality more) __________________ "I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does* seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater

February 21, 2014, 07:46 AM	#104
Pilot Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2000 Posts: 4,193	I handled one in person at the Outdoor show in Harrisburg, PA. For the money, I thought it was fine for its purposes. I will wait to make up my mind until I shoot one, and put rounds down range. __________________ Pilot

February 22, 2014, 01:16 AM	#108
sakata8242 Member Join Date: August 14, 2010 Posts: 55	Not saturated because it's SA? Give me a break, now you're just splitting hairs. Not to mention the trigger pull will be likely be ridiculously heavy for a SA because of the intended target audience of the pistol. The fact is the market is saturated with single stack 9mm pocket guns Ruger LC9? Springfield XDS? Keltec PF9? Taurus PT709? Kimber Solo? M&P Shield? Boberg XR9? Beretta Nano? Kahr CW9, PM9, CM9? SIG P290? Walther PPS? SIG P938? SIG P239? (Granted that's pushing the subcompact category, but it's still a single stack 9mm) All. Single. Stack. 9mm. If that's not saturated then I'd like to know what is. And what makes you so sure Glock won't make a single stack 9? Are you privy to information directly from them? Because the only difference between a 9x19 single stack Glock and the Glock 42 is essentially a slightly longer grip to accommodate the longer 9x19 cartridge and a heavier recoil spring. There is no way they're missing out on the party, even if they are a few years late. Last edited by sakata8242; February 22, 2014 at 01:33 AM.

February 22, 2014, 01:35 AM	#110
sakata8242 Member Join Date: August 14, 2010 Posts: 55	I realize that, post clarified to reflect that. And as I mentioned above, that distinction is not a particularly good one, since the trigger on it is likely to be heavier and worse than the striker fired offerings listed above because of the target market the pistol is intended for. 7 pound "SA" trigger anyone? Even some of the DAO offerings like the Kahr PM9 have better triggers compared to the SA only SIG P938. It also doesn't change my opinion of the gun -- that it isn't all that interesting, or better. It's just new. And I'm sure it will sell reasonably well, if for no other reason for that fact and that it's a Remington. But again, I don't predict it to be any kind of a game changer in the market. Last edited by sakata8242; February 22, 2014 at 01:41 AM.

February 20, 2014, 08:50 PM	#103
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 9,142	The 4.1 trigger pull (per Quinn) surprised me. Maybe it won't be 1911ish crisp but a decently clean 4 to 5 pound pull would be great.

February 21, 2014, 09:44 AM	#105
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	A 1.5 inch spread at 25 yards, and a 4.1lb trigger pull? Did I read that right? Holy frijole Batman. I'm just glad they don't have a double column else I'd be really annoyed with all the plastic guns I acquired.

February 22, 2014, 12:05 AM	#106
sakata8242 Member Join Date: August 14, 2010 Posts: 55	It just doesn't seem all that interesting, other than it's based off an old/classic/antique/whatever you want to call it design. Single stack 9mm subcompact? Saturated market and there are other options that have established track records. I still suspect it will sell reasonably well, but most likely to people who aren't shooters. Uncle Ed might buy one, shoot a couple mags through it, carry it every now and again, but that's about it. Hopefully Remington can make their money back before Glock releases its single stack 9.

February 22, 2014, 07:47 AM	#112
Pond, James Pond Senior Member Join Date: July 12, 2011 Location: Top of the Baltic stack Posts: 6,079	I still like it despite some reviews and I enjoyed the gunblast video. Regrettably though, I don't expect to ever see one in the flesh here! __________________ When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic. Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.

February 22, 2014, 03:47 PM	#115
chris in va Senior Member Join Date: December 26, 2004 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 13,806	I just wish people would stop referring to the R51 as a 'subcompact' or 'pocket' gun. It's actually larger than my Kahr K9 and closer to my CZ P01 in size.

February 22, 2014, 05:01 PM	#116
pat701 Senior Member Join Date: November 6, 2005 Location: South west Missouri Posts: 315	I am shocked!!!!!

February 23, 2014, 02:27 AM	#118
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 9,142	Gunblast measured the trigger at 4.1 pounds. One of the reasons I have not purchased a Sig 938 is the trigger. I am hopeful all the R51s are in the 4 to 5 pound range. I'm a 1911 guy most of the time so have a trigger pull which is consistent with a 1911 is a plus. I also like the size of the R51 for a belt gun.

February 23, 2014, 10:28 AM	#119
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,190	I don't like it. I think its butt ugly but it is way too early to say its a bust. It might turn out to be the most popular thing since sliced bread.

February 23, 2014, 10:45 AM	#120
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	" I have read before that he often refuses to even put up reviews if he doesn't think the gun is of decent quality." This is how American Rifleman operated when I was with the organization. If a gun didn't meet some basic quality standards (and a lot did NOT), they never made it into the pages of the magazine. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

February 23, 2014, 10:55 AM	#121
g527 Junior Member Join Date: February 22, 2014 Location: Western N.C. Posts: 12	Hi, I am new here but not to guns. Have any of you that don't like the R 51 seen the ramworks.net site by Richard Mann ? He reviews it, shoots it ,takes it apart & puts it back together with no trouble. His young son takes it apart in 17 seconds & puts it together in 29 seconds. He also likes the gun very much. He has a background & experience in guns that will rival anyone. He also is a writer for Shooting Illustrated. He has written gun and bullet books too. His review blows that TTAG review by Nick Leghorn out of the water.I thought that review by TTAG on the R 51 was terrible. He starts out loving the gun & turns around & bashes it. He got slide bite from it.I have been shooting PPK's for over 50 years & have never gotten slide bite. They are the worst biters around. I am sure the size of Leghorns hand, huge, had something to do with it. I am buying the R 51 as I need it for the easy slide rack & recoil. That alone would sell me on it.

February 24, 2014, 03:00 AM	#124
jimbob86 Junior member Join Date: October 4, 2007 Location: All the way to NEBRASKA Posts: 8,722	While I am interested in the gun, and love it on paper ....... Am I the only one that noticed the healing slide bite wound on Mr. Quinn's hand? My hands are decidedly leaner and smaller than most ..... I doubt I'd have that problem...... YMMV.

February 24, 2014, 05:05 AM	#125
WardenWolf Junior member Join Date: December 12, 2013 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 135	Looking at the design of the gun, it made me wonder how he managed to get slide bite out of that. It has as very deep grip shelf to keep your hand from riding up. Then I saw the video, and realized he was gripping it entirely wrong. I have a similarly-sized pistol, a Polish P-64. You need to firmly grip it so the webbing of your hand is fully under the shelf. He was fat-handing it in a very awkward way rather than allowing the piece to properly sit in his hand. He basically had to TRY for this to happen, and that's exactly what he did. If you look, the pistol is actually turned slightly to the left in his grip rather than being pointed straight out. So, I'm going to call the slide bite 100% bogus. Now, let's move on to the recoil: yes, recoil in a pistol like this is going to be rather nasty. The low bore axis means it's recoiling directly into the webbing of your hand. You need to be gripping it tightly or it's going to hurt. It's just like holding a stock to your shoulder: if you don't hold it tightly, and in the right spot, it will hurt a LOT more. As for grips, you'll notice the grip panels are removable. I'm sure someone will come up with different grip styles for it. However, the grip safety design will cause problems for a wraparound grip. The only truly damning thing, if true, is the reassembly issue. If the problem really does not always show up immediately, but rather an unpredictable number of rounds in the future, that is a major risk. If you don't know about this, or aren't careful, this could get you killed.