Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Would you give the Remington R51 another chance?

Discussion in 'Handgun Discussion' started by raftman, Apr 14, 2015.

  1. raftman

    raftman Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,060
    Likes Received:
    251
    So I assume we all know the story. For those who don't... Amid a great deal of anticipation the R51 9mm pistol was released early last year and proved to be an absolute disaster. The pistol was plagued with problems such as the occasional tendency to fire out of battery, a horrifically gritty action, parts breakages, and even reports of pistols leaving the factory improperly assembled and missing parts (and many, many other problems). Long story short, it seems they got far more wrong than right.

    Remington responded with the promise of replacing R51's with working examples (which would be returned with extra mags and a Pelican case) or a voucher for a Remington 1911-variant. Unsurprisingly, Remington's initial forecast of beginning production on the new, improved R51's in the fall of 2014 proved too optimistic. From what I've read, production on the new R51's is supposed to begin this summer, meaning the people who opted to send in their R51's for replacements in many cases have been waiting for well over year.

    This leads to a question... would anyone here give such a pistol another chance? If the design is not inherently flawed, then it's possible to execute it properly but I am wondering what folks' thoughts are on giving another chance to a pistol that failed on such a colossal level?
     
    WAYNO likes this.
  2. Riot

    Riot Benton County, Washington Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,035
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    No...I believed the hype and promoted the pistol (that American made, all metal pistol was literally on my buy list and would have been the only 9mm I would have owned) but it had waaay too many problems outside the gate.

    *edit*

    In my opinion, the R51 was a flop that will go down in gun failures like the Vltor Bren Ten and the Masada/ACR. Remington should have had their poop in a line before releasing the pistol...but they took a lot of people's money and gave them a lemon.

    As they say...

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2015
  3. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,769
    Likes Received:
    6,998
    Well at least they were successful in one regard.. it's heavy enough to actually be a paperweight. I guess they coulda done worse.
     
  4. SynapticSilence

    SynapticSilence Battle Ground, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    728
    Likes Received:
    387
    Anybody who didn't jump on the 1911 offer is nuts. And now they're bringing out a new pocket 380 before they've even got the R51 disaster rectified. Poor management and marketing strategy on a catastrophic scale.
     
  5. Bill Siegle

    Bill Siegle Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    184
    I got burnt by the R51 once. Gonna need to see a whole lotta real world reports with overwhelming good reports before I try another. Remington refunded my buy price after 6months of my gun sitting in the factory. I sure did want that gun to work. It was a great concept being thin but yet large enough to shoot comfortably. Remington has in my opinion, insulted their customer base by introducing other guns before fixing the R51s they have waiting.
     
  6. RVTECH

    RVTECH LaPine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,256
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Remington introducing a flop? Where was the R&D QC before this hit the shelves? I don't own one (obviously never will) but this is something that should never have happened with the name Remington behind it. Kind of like if Ford reintroduced the Pinto - or Chevy the Vega.
     
  7. WAYNO

    WAYNO Oregon City Gold Supporter Gold Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    Well now...I have no interest in this Remington offering, but if I did, I might give it a second chance, but only after the new-and-improved version has been on the market for a while, and it's received nothing but glowing reviews from the folks who actually buy them and shoot them. And I will never believe what the gun-rag writers say. They said this R-51 was perfect to start with.o_O

    WAYNO.
     
    raftman likes this.
  8. raftman

    raftman Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,060
    Likes Received:
    251
    This is what continues to mystify me. Such a gun would be no surprise if it came from a startup two-man operation working out of a garage, but from an outfit with the resources and experience of Remington? What did they think was going to happen?

    I've given second chances to products with a spotty histories. For example I did buy the 2015 incarnation of Century's CETME/G3 clone, the C308 (and am happy with it, by the way). But at their worst, even Century products were never so shoddily-done as the R51 and that's saying something.
     
  9. jbett98

    jbett98 NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    6,450
    Likes Received:
    7,647
    This update is from Remington's web page last year

    Remington R51 Pistol Product Update
    July 25, 2014


    Remington_logo.ashx.png

    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.
     
  10. Mark W.

    Mark W. Silverton, OR Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    5,772
    Likes Received:
    4,949
    Still on my list to buy. But like others I'll wait to see how the fix comes out.
     
    MilitantBEEMER likes this.
  11. WAYNO

    WAYNO Oregon City Gold Supporter Gold Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    I'm not defending anybody, but...There is so much competition right now between all the manufacturers with little-bitty guns. They'll do anything to get their products to market, even prematurely. It's not acceptable. And all the manufacturers have discovered they can use their customers to do a good portion of the R&D/QC, saving the company that much more money. It's not just Remington.

    I remember the Vega very well. All of GM's controlled testing of their new silicon-aluminum engine indicated they'd finally discovered the Northwest Passage, the Fountain of Youth, the Mother Lode, and Heavenly Manna all rolled into one little ugly motor. Then they released it to the public, and to real world testing. It didn't take the soccer Moms, and the teenagers, and the office workers very long to figure out how to destroy this engine. I think modern firearm R&D is not much different. In a controlled environment, and people doing the testing that know how to use and treat firearms correctly, these new releases work as designed for them. Then the product is turned loose to the public. The gun is now exposed to lint and sweat and salt and sand and all kinds of stuff that's not available in a lab. Then it's operated by folks that don't pull a trigger squarely, and don't release it far enough for a reset, and their wrists are made of jelly, and they don't understand that some flying-ashtray bullets just may not feed. That's the real-world testing that a lab can't duplicate.

    WAYNO.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2015
  12. RVTECH

    RVTECH LaPine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,256
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Can't duplicate? sure they could have - it they had taken the time to do so. Maybe get with a 'real world' outdoor range and let several random people try it out. Maybe send guns to the various gun publications or established test 'subjects' for testing and evaluation. Better testing could have been accomplished if they had put a little more thought and time into it.
     
  13. Sstrand

    Sstrand La Grande OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,762
    Likes Received:
    2,683
    Perhaps the Remington management team gets their marching orders from Bloomberg and ruining the company's reputation is a way to dissuade people from owning firearms!?!?!?!?

    Sheldon
     
  14. raftman

    raftman Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,060
    Likes Received:
    251
    A couple thoughts on this.

    First, I remember watching a Remington promotional video for the R51 back when it first came out. They stated rather explicitly that they torture-tested their pistol, dropped it, froze it, did everything possible to break it and it came through with flying colors. Given the outcome they got, their promotional video would have to have been a grotesque lie.

    And secondly, if Remington's plan was to have the public be the testers for their product, it's a colossal miscalculation on their part. Not only did they give themselves a black eye from which they will take a long time to recover but the R51 itself has got to be a substantial financial loss.

    (Incidentally, the promotional vid is still available on YouTube)

     
  15. Alfonse

    Alfonse North Central Washington Member

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    15
    I don't know specifically what went wrong with the R51. If the tests were not falsified, the issue is likely that the tests were not conducted on production representative products.

    Pre-production processes likely did not produce parts with the exact tolerances, or same level of variation, of what eventually came out in production. I would guess many of the pistols sent out for reviews were also pre-production units.

    I am not defending anything, but the tests could have been fine. If that is the case, they just should have repeated testing a large sample of pistols that came from the actual, production processes before releasing the product for customer shipments.
     
  16. Jacurso

    Jacurso Douglas Co. Active Member

    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    52
    I bought my Glock 17 in 1986 and never looked back. Over 7,000 rounds later, no problems whatsoever, no parts replacement, no mods...accurate and reliable as all get out! 300 yard silhouette target...no problem.
    I liked it so well, I bought several more in various calibers.
     
  17. bzltyr

    bzltyr Portland Metro area Active Member

    Messages:
    347
    Likes Received:
    84
    Maybe replace recoil spring I thought the pistol wss funky. Didnt like the way it felt. Not interested. I have LC9s Pro. Working great. Eyeing G43. Ee shsll see. :)
     
  18. Mikej

    Mikej Portland Gold Supporter Gold Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    3,135
    Likes Received:
    3,027
    Question was, would I give the R51 another chance. I didn't have one to begin with. I won't give it a first chance. And no, I wouldn't give it a second either.

    First gun for Wifey was a Kel Tec P11, it shot four feet low at thirty feet. Cost us $70.00 to send it back [we were naive/noobs didn't know better]. They sent it back fixed and we sold it pronto. It may not make sense but I don't think I'd buy any Kel Tec hand gun again.
     
  19. BlindedByScience

    BlindedByScience Vancouver WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    431
    No reason to risk your life on pistol with a sketchy past. There are many really great choices out there, with proven track records. Maybe they'll get it right, maybe they won't. I wouldn't take the risk, personally.
     
    Mikej likes this.
  20. 45 for me

    45 for me Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    268
    To answer the question, absolutely. I of course will wait until the first batch comes out to make sure the quality problems are fixed, and wait for the price to come down. Regardless of the reputation, I test any gun I buy for protection thoroughly before I start carrying it. But I have more than enough guns I can use to really need this one as well, I just like it. Small 9 with the Pederson action is interesting enough to own and shoot, and probably more so if it is a flop. So as a collector, I will be buying.

    Interestingly enough, my job title is Director of QC & R&D, and though we don't manufacture firearms, we are owned by a private equity fund, so I have some thoughts as well:

    " ...It's not just Remington." No, it's not, it's Cerberus Capital, a private equity fund owned by the Freedom Group that purchased Remington. Sadly, my experience is that that at best, equity funds are neutral, but far more often a combination of wanting immediate returns with no thoughts to the future, and the fact that these guys always think they are smartest in the room, tends to lead to unreasonable targets that result in quality and service problems like what you saw with Remington. Remington died, they are a corpse animated by Cerberus.

    "First, I remember watching a Remington promotional video for the R51 back when it first came out. They stated rather explicitly that they torture-tested their pistol, dropped it, froze it, did everything possible to break it and it came through with flying colors. Given the outcome they got, their promotional video would have to have been a grotesque lie."

    Not necessarily, as Alphonse alluded to above, the pre production models are by definition different from actual production. The production R51's that weren't manufactured wrong may still meet those torture tests. The problem was the vast number of defects. This can be poor industrial engineering in the mfg. line setup, or poor management on the line, none of which mean bad design.


    One thing I will say, is the airline you want to fly is the last one that crashed. They got their wakeup call and are now probably the safest to fly because they are no longer complacent. It would be nice to manage out the complacency, and good management does, but bad management is more common.

    After something like this. excuses don't matter. The company needs to issue a mea culpa, which they did, and then execute above and beyond until everyone forgets. That's what were waiting to see. Either way, I'll pick one up, and if it is broken, I will get it fixed.

    ;)

    PS - if it wasn't clear, I believe the success of the pre production models proves out the design.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2015
    Sstrand likes this.