Sweet! Remington has announced a new handgun...

M

Mike Irwin

Staff
Oddly enough I picked up a back issue of Rifleman last night (while in the "reading room") and one of the guns reviewed was the Beretta Nano.

I remember reading that review when it first came out and was completely underwhelmed by the look of the Nano. It's square and blocky and looks as if it would snag everything in comes near.

The N's MSRP is also about $75 higher.

I was so underwhelmed by the N that I'd forgotten about it. I've got several 9mms, including my HK P7 PSP, which I use for carry. I even got rid of several 9mms (Beretta, early Kahr) because I didn't see the need to have them when I've got the PSP, a Radom, and also a High Power...

But the more I read about the Remington, the more I look at it, the more I want one.
 
K

kcub

New member
I don't think it's ugly at all. To me it looks like one of those older model HK's that only right handed people can shoot.
 
W

Walt Sherrill

New member
Pond said:
I think it looks very nice and seems to combine two things that I've always liked but never found combined: 9x19 and the blowback design.
Click to expand...

According to the article posted, it's not a blowback design -- but a Pedersen design, which uses a FIXED BARREL (like most blowback guns) AND a locked breech (locking breech block).

I'd love to see an action video of how the mechanism works.
 
Last edited:
S

Spats McGee

Administrator
Whether this thing will be a hit or not remains to be seen. From what I've seen on my "internet haunts," though, it's certainly stirring up discussion.

Who was it that said "there's no such thing as bad publicity?"
 
W

Walt Sherrill

New member
I went back and read the Wikipedia article on the Model 51.

See the "Variants" section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_51

It says that the Model 53 (a .45 acp version that the Army wanted) was found to be, during evaluation and testing, both more accurate and reliable than the 1911, and had noticeably less felt recoil. But the costs for starting up large-scale production was much higher, and when the stuff hit the fan with WWI, the government didn't want to spend the money.

The article reads as though the 53 might have been a better choice than the 1911, but costs got in the way.

I wonder if Remington will try a Model 53 if their new 9mm finds a market? I'd be tempted..,.
 
M

Mike Irwin

Staff
From what I can tell, this announcement is generating a TON of buzz in the firearms community.

I think it's going to be very difficult to come by one of the R-51s when Remington releases them in February.

Hopefully they have a goodly stock ready to go.

Still, it's not such a bad thing standing back and letting the first generation go out and letting someone else be the canary in the coal mine.
 
F

Fishbed77

New member
Still, it's not such a bad thing standing back and letting the first generation go out and letting someone else be the canary in the coal mine.
Click to expand...

THIS. ^^^^

I don't trust Freedom Group's QA/QC at all, much less the fact that this is one of the first all-new designs (let's face it, it's not a Model 51) to be introduced under Freedom/Cerberus's control. That makes me worry about the amount of true R&D/testing to go into this new pistol.

That said, I find it to be very intriguing on paper, and I will be keeping a close watch on this one.
 
N

Noreaster

New member
R51/P232
Weight 20oz/18oz blue/23.6 SS, Width .96/1.3, Length 6/6.6, Height 4.5/4.7. Sorta like a 9mm P232. I hope Remington takes their time with it and doesn't produce a lemon.
 
B

Bezoar

Moderator
after pictures id rather have an all metal version of the original gun, just want a longer barrel. However for this style of gun,

the only real compeetition is the hi power pocket 9 with a single stack.

now a little more barrel would be nice. but.. at least the sights can be changed out if you want on your own. dovetails are fun.

No manual safeties. god thats a nice touch.

no glock style slide take down.
 
C

carguychris

New member
southjk said:
Here is the video but I'm not quite sure what I'm seeing.
Click to expand...
The original Model 51, the stillborn Model 53, and the new R51 use what's most commonly known as the Pedersen delayed-blowback system. The barrel is fixed, and there is a seperate breechblock in the slide (red). Upon firing, the slide and barrel breechblock recoil together for a short distance, at which point the breechblock strikes a locking shoulder in the frame; this allows pressure within the chamber to drop to a safe level. Shortly afterwards, a cam in the slide lifts the breechblock out of engagement with the frame, allowing the breechblock to continue rearward to complete extraction. The green thing in the video is the extractor; it is attached to the breechblock.

The pressure-mitigating delay allows the breech to stay closed long enough to utilize the full potential of a high-pressure cartridge, without requiring an excessively massive slide and/or excessively stiff recoil spring, as would be needed with a simple blowback action (Hi-Point pistols are an example of this). The fixed barrel aids accuracy by eliminating the barrel-to-slide alignment and lockup issues inherent in Browning tilting-barrel autoloaders.

Other than the Remingtons, I'm not aware of any other relatively common autoloading pistols that use the Pedersen system. The discontinued Benelli B-series (B-76, B-80, etc.) used a similar system, but the breechblock was unlocked by a lever rather than cams.

The purple thing in the video is the internal hammer. Fully enclosed internal hammers are common in pocket revolvers and .22LR target pistols, but have been used infrequently in centerfire autoloaders during the past 5-6 decades. The Model 51 also used an internal hammer. IOW these pistols are NOT striker-fired.
 
Last edited:
P

Pond James Pond

New member
I'd love to see an action video of how the mechanism works.
Click to expand...

There is a video of the mechanism embedded in the original article that was linked in the OP.

It shows how the parts behave once a round has been discharge.
 
J

James K

Member In Memoriam
Not quite the case, Chris. The barrel is fixed and doesn't move at all. The breechblock is pushed down into a locking area in the frame by a camming surface in the top of the slide, but has some room to move back under pressure. Further, note that the breechblock support in the frame is not at a 90 degree angle, it has a slight rearward slope.

When the cartridge fires, the pressure forces the case to the rear. Unlike a true locked breech (e.g., the 1911), the breechblock can move back a short distance relative to the barrel. This is OK since it will not allow the case to move back beyond the thick part of the case. But the pressure forces the breechblock to the rear, where the rear of the frame surface tries to cam the breechblock upward. But it can't do that because the slide won't allow it. But the breechblock, in moving rearward, gives a "kick" to the slide, moving it rearward. As the slide moves to the rear, it allows the breechblock to be cammed upward and out of engagement with the frame. The slide is also given enough energy to move it back smartly and complete the extraction-ejection and return-to-battery cycle. (In effect, the breechblock itself acts like a short stroke piston.)

Since the barrel is fixed, the action is called a delayed blowback, or "hesitation lock". Other actions, including rifles, have been designed the same way, though not the Pedersen rifle, which used a different type of retarded blowback.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top