Ladies Pistol Project II—Concealed Carry Pistols

[SCurmudgeon]

The American Rifleman conducted what they called the "Ladies Pistol Project II - Concealed Carry Pistols."  55 women tested 24 pistols and their subjective feedback was tallied and analyzed.  Since the R51 was included in the evaluation, I thought the results might be of interest to this audience.

The charts are a little hard to read, but the R51 scored 15th out of 24.  And this doesn't surprise me for two reasons:

First, we all know the struggles with breaking in an R51.  For example, if participants weren't explicitly instructed to use the slingshot method to load a full magazine, they might have deducted points for difficult slide manipulation.  Or if they didn't know about the combat sight picture aiming, they might not have felt the pistol was accurate.

Second, the R51 is competing against a lot of high quality, nice shooting, conceal carry / compact / subcompact pistols.  And although American Rifleman tried to collect subjective data in an objective manner, I have to believe there were instances where the R51 suffered by comparison.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2017/9/8/results-american-rifleman-ladies-pistol-project-ii-concealed-carry-pistols/

[lklawson]

Hmm...

There just seem to be some people who want to find reasons to hate the R51, or, more likely, as a proxy for hating Freedom Group.

I recently read a review by a "gun testing" publication, who rates on a Letter Grade scale, A to F.  They (to quote) "deducted a full letter" grade because the R51 wouldn't reliably feed one particular brand of ammo (out of 5 tested) which, apparently, they have a particular love for.  Then another "full letter" grade because they thought it was too hard to field strip.

So the pistol is finicky about some ammo?  Dang.  I remember a time when that was just assumed to be part of a semi-auto.  Stock 1911's were particularly notorious for it.

Field stripping?  Well, I admit that my Makarov is easier.  I also admit to having a great deal of trouble at first.  Why?  Because I was doing it wrong.  Once I watched the Remington video and learned the right way, it was suddenly very easy.

Feh.

Maybe these ladies are in the same boat?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

[1911SHOOTER]

Hmm...

There just seem to be some people who want to find reasons to hate the R51, or, more likely, as a proxy for hating Freedom Group.

I recently read a review by a "gun testing" publication, who rates on a Letter Grade scale, A to F.  They (to quote) "deducted a full letter" grade because the R51 wouldn't reliably feed one particular brand of ammo (out of 5 tested) which, apparently, they have a particular love for.  Then another "full letter" grade because they thought it was too hard to field strip.

So the pistol is finicky about some ammo?  Dang.  I remember a time when that was just assumed to be part of a semi-auto.  Stock 1911's were particularly notorious for it.

Field stripping?  Well, I admit that my Makarov is easier.  I also admit to having a great deal of trouble at first.  Why?  Because I was doing it wrong.  Once I watched the Remington video and learned the right way, it was suddenly very easy.

Feh.

Maybe these ladies are in the same boat?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Kirk,
     I agree with you 100%!
There are people who will get on a blog and spew hate just to be hating something.   
I have had 1911s that would almost puke on some ammo.  My R51 now shoots anything.   
Field stripping?  Once I found the clamp I needed to hold the barrel, I had the cleaning down pat.
Just like my Makarov!
Blackie

[russc2542]

An interesting article but really falls apart if you read it: I don't think they had anyone familiar with data gathering, analysis, or presentation involved nor an editor to make sure they didn't make dumb statements and ill-placed typos.

Half of their statements make as much sense as saying people prefer the color orange because on a survey about fruit they said tangerines taste better than apples.

[SCurmudgeon]

Yes, I agree that the accompanying analysis was not very logical, but what do you expect ...

OK, I won't do that joke here.

I referenced the American Rifleman LPP II article because it included the R51 in a comparison study, and not too many folks are doing that right now.

However, before LPP II, there was the original Ladies Pistol Project.  This article was a bit more interesting because ladies compared large pistols with small, semi-autos with revolvers.  It dispelled some of the prejudices boyfriends and big box gun clerks have about recommending handguns to women.  The women had no problem operating semi-auto handguns and preferred them to wheel guns.  (4 revolvers were tested with 14 semi-autos and only 1 revolver was ranked in the top 9 overall.)

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2017/8/21/the-american-rifleman-ladies-pistol-project/

[Chokejug]

I have the same beef with some gun reviewers/gun writers.

One gun that states over and over in their manual NOT TO USE A CERTAIN SPECIFIC BRAND, one particular reviewer used it ANYWAY!

Yep, and then wrote it up as a MASSIVE FAIL!

GGRRRRR!

[1911SHOOTER]

I have the same beef with some gun reviewers/gun writers.

One gun that states over and over in their manual NOT TO USE A CERTAIN SPECIFIC BRAND, one particular reviewer used it ANYWAY!

Yep, and then wrote it up as a MASSIVE FAIL!

GGRRRRR!

Jug,
     And I bet that same gun writer claimed that he was unbiased and told it like it was, good or bad.   Was he a magazine writer, or an online reviewer?
Don't want to get misled by reading him.
Blackie

[Chokejug]

Blackie, I really cant say, remember which one it was now.  I have watched so many videos, etc, on this gun and the Boberg, that I just cant recall now.

However, both of these guns have had somewhat of "bad raps" in my estimation anyway.

Some deservedly so, and some simply "pile on"  type operations.