Remington R-51 Pistol Forum

General Category => R51 General Discussion => Topic started by: R51Fan2017 on January 20, 2018, 01:45:24 PM

Title: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: R51Fan2017 on January 20, 2018, 01:45:24 PM
As the title says. I can actually load a 45acp into a R51 mag intended for a 9mm. If the sides weren't bent in, I could load .45 in these mags. Why the heck did Remington make a 9mm mag so wide it can hold .45 with no problem? I mean, this is a glove fit for a .45. Just like my 1911 mags. Seriously??
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: funflyer on January 20, 2018, 03:57:48 PM
Uh-oh, someone's got too much time on his hands ;D ,or there's bad weather outside.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 20, 2018, 05:05:03 PM
Anyone else getting the idea that this mag design was not for this gun when it started?

I think they started with some existing mag and just modified until "it sort of worked"!

Anyone have the Rem 380, the high $ company that tey just bought ought Rorhbaugh or something like that?

Well, Rems new version of that gun uses a mag with a full length spacer welded into the back of it.
I am sure it was Rorhbor's 9mm mags just reworked.

Maybe the original company did both that way, as I believe they made it in both 9mm and 380.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: funflyer on January 21, 2018, 02:29:26 PM
Quote from: Chokejug on January 20, 2018, 05:05:03 PM
Anyone else getting the idea that this mag design was not for this gun when it started?
I think they started with some existing mag and just modified until "it sort of worked"!

I don't own a 1911 to compare, but the R51 mag does appear to use a 1911 shell or very similar. From what I can tell the 1911 9mm and 45 use a similar shell also, but the 9mm has the channels stamped into it for the narrower round and spring. Reading some of the 1911 forums, it does seem that the 1911 is plagued with the same mag problems as our R51, i.e. nosedives, stovepipes etc. Later today I am going over to a friends house and compare his 45 1911 mags with the R51 mags.


Quote from: Chokejug on January 20, 2018, 05:05:03 PM
Anyone have the Rem 380, the high $ company that tey just bought ought Rorhbaugh or something like that?
Well, Rems new version of that gun uses a mag with a full length spacer welded into the back of it.
I am sure it was Rorhbor's 9mm mags just reworked.
Maybe the original company did both that way, as I believe they made it in both 9mm and 380.

Yes, that's exactly what Rohrbough did. They just dimpled the rear of the R9 mag shell and slipped a spacer in so it would hold the .380 round. Thankfully Remington had the good sense to leave that design alone and not screw with it. Though adding the last round slide hold-open and relocating the mag release was definitely an improvement and they did get that right. My RM380 is a joy to shoot and my favorite small pistol. Can't recall how many rounds I have through it now but it's well north of 300 and it's never had a fail of any kind. I made a new hammer spring seat to reduce the pull weight instead of using the Galloway kit and it has settled in at right around 7 pounds with no light primer strikes.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: 1911SHOOTER on January 21, 2018, 05:18:09 PM
Quote from: funflyer on January 20, 2018, 03:57:48 PM
Uh-oh, someone's got too much time on his hands ;D ,or there's bad weather outside.


Todd,
All the above.  :<)  :)   I have the same problem.
Blackie
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: lklawson on January 23, 2018, 11:00:04 AM
Quote from: R51Fan2017 on January 20, 2018, 01:45:24 PM
As the title says. I can actually load a 45acp into a R51 mag intended for a 9mm. If the sides weren't bent in, I could load .45 in these mags. Why the heck did Remington make a 9mm mag so wide it can hold .45 with no problem? I mean, this is a glove fit for a .45. Just like my 1911 mags. Seriously??
When the Gen 1 was introduced there was rumor that Big Green was going to come out with a .40S&W version as well and maybe a .357 Sig.  The fact that the RP9 was released before the RP45, both on the same platform, implies that releasing one platform size for several caliber chamberings is something that Remington thinks about.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: R51Fan2017 on January 23, 2018, 11:48:03 AM
Kirk,

I know what you are saying, but I would like to think that if Remington had designed this mag for 9mm only, we wouldn't be having so many fitment and function problems. I would like to see a 40 R51 come out in the future though!
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 23, 2018, 04:35:34 PM
You apparently dont believe that the .40 is dead?

That new tech, namely bullets has completly out ran it, making it totally useless?

But then, the new bullets help the .40 as well, but possibky "over-kill" for SD.

Then call it a big game load.

(Legal here, .40 and up, during pistol season.)
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: lklawson on January 24, 2018, 10:22:19 AM
Quote from: R51Fan2017 on January 23, 2018, 11:48:03 AM
Kirk,

I know what you are saying, but I would like to think that if Remington had designed this mag for 9mm only, we wouldn't be having so many fitment and function problems.
Maybe.  Hard to say but I think it's just that they didn't get it right the first time out more than they were trying to make it too flexible and cover other ammo.  I'm basing this opinion on the shape of the top of the follower for the Gen 1 mags.  If I had any .40 S&W, I'd try loading it in the mag.  But I don't.  :)


QuoteI would like to see a 40 R51 come out in the future though!
It would be neat.  I have friends who still hold that .40S&W is the perfect balance for a semi-auto pistol cartridge.  This in spite of the recent decline in popularity.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: mr220v on January 24, 2018, 01:20:28 PM
So, i could potentially change my barrel, breech block, main spring, and magazine and convert my 9mm gun to 357 sig then?
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: lklawson on January 24, 2018, 02:04:36 PM
Quote from: mr220v on January 24, 2018, 01:20:28 PM
So, i could potentially change my barrel, breech block, main spring, and magazine and convert my 9mm gun to 357 sig then?
Sort of.  Right now we are speculating that you could use the same magazine.  :)

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 24, 2018, 04:32:23 PM
220v, IF you could find someone to do so, it would approach my wanting a titainium frame in $!

Those companies that first came out with a 9mm and then tried to "upgrade" the basic pistol to .40 have usually struggled greatly.

Just getting this action to 9mm took some doing!
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: mr220v on January 25, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
Seems like the r51 breech block is much more solid than the model 51s.  I was looking at getting one, then found out that modern 380 tends to break it.

How much will this version take?  Hard to say.  The current r51 does pretty well with hotter loads though.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: R51Fan2017 on January 25, 2018, 01:07:58 PM
It helps that the current generation was actually designed for using +P ammo. So anything below +P is essentially "breathing easy".
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 25, 2018, 02:35:51 PM
BUT, +P is their absolute limit; or so I heard.

Dont know what they might use for an "over pressure" proof load, or even if they do.

Also heard that +P+ was total a no-no, but then, supposedly, its also over SAMI specs.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: R51Fan2017 on January 25, 2018, 05:12:28 PM
Quote from: Chokejug on January 25, 2018, 02:35:51 PM
BUT, +P is their absolute limit; or so I heard.

Dont know what they might use for an "over pressure" proof load, or even if they do.

Also heard that +P+ was total a no-no, but then, supposedly, its also over SAMI specs.

Read Pat Cascio's review on Survival Blog. He used +P+ loads in it towards the end of his review. It ate them just fine. Would I do that?? Heck no! But he did. And they are supposed to shoot a proof load in it before it leaves the factory. If they aren't doing that, shame on Remington.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: mr220v on January 25, 2018, 07:37:37 PM
Dont know if the lack of support for +p+ loads is lack of strength or Remington not wanting the liability or warranty claims. 

A stiffer barrel spring could help bring the limit up a bit.  Or at least thats what is recommended for my makarov when shooting 115grn bufalo bore.  Grandma might not be able to rack the slide, but whatever.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Engineerpower on January 25, 2018, 08:21:53 PM
Quote from: mr220v on January 24, 2018, 01:20:28 PM
So, i could potentially change my barrel, breech block, main spring, and magazine and convert my 9mm gun to 357 sig then?

Oooooo, how about .22 TCM?! Would that just be the barrel, maybe the spring?
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: 1911SHOOTER on January 25, 2018, 09:11:37 PM
Engineer Power,
.22TCM? Surely you Jest!
Blackie
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Engineerpower on January 25, 2018, 09:20:34 PM
(https://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Mind-Blow-2.gif)
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 25, 2018, 11:11:23 PM
.22 TCM certainly would be an easier conversion here than .357 Sig!

And more beef left around the chamber.

But my question would be, would the AL frame take the beating from the breach block?
(Which also might have a problem here)
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: mr220v on January 26, 2018, 09:22:35 AM
.22tcm is a good bit longer than 9mm or .357sig.  The r51 frame would need a redesign to accommodate that one.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Engineerpower on January 26, 2018, 09:38:41 AM
Quote from: mr220v on January 26, 2018, 09:22:35 AM
.22tcm is a good bit longer than 9mm or .357sig.  The r51 frame would need a redesign to accommodate that one.

There's the 9r bullet profile made to fit standard 9mm mags.

Quote from: Chokejug on January 25, 2018, 11:11:23 PM
But my question would be, would the AL frame take the beating from the breach block?
(Which also might have a problem here)

From what I understand, .22 TCM has ~40% less recoil than the 9mm, which would be easier on the frame than its default chambering.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: 1911SHOOTER on January 26, 2018, 10:54:59 AM
.22TCM cartridges are about twice as expensive as 9MM.   Not a good upgrade
expense wise.   
Blackie
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: lklawson on January 26, 2018, 11:28:43 AM
Quote from: Chokejug on January 25, 2018, 02:35:51 PM
BUT, +P is their absolute limit; or so I heard.

Dont know what they might use for an "over pressure" proof load, or even if they do.

Also heard that +P+ was total a no-no, but then, supposedly, its also over SAMI specs.
There is no SAAMI spec for +P+. 

SAAMI specs max pressure for 9mm Luger at 35,000 max and +P at 38,500 max.  Anything over 38,500 is "overpressure" for +P  it could be 38,501 or 38-bazillion.  None of it is SAAMI spec past 38,500.  :)

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Engineerpower on January 26, 2018, 11:30:04 AM
Quote from: 1911SHOOTER on January 26, 2018, 10:54:59 AM
.22TCM cartridges are about twice as expensive as 9MM.   Not a good upgrade
expense wise.   
Blackie

Maybe not an endeavor in economics, but I bet this little gun would make a sweet rocket-launcher, and would reduce the already-low flip to about nothing.

And besides, I happen to know there's at least one regular on here that's also on 22tcm.net  ;)
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: lklawson on January 26, 2018, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: Engineerpower on January 26, 2018, 11:30:04 AM
Quote from: 1911SHOOTER on January 26, 2018, 10:54:59 AM
.22TCM cartridges are about twice as expensive as 9MM.   Not a good upgrade
expense wise.   
Blackie

Maybe not an endeavor in economics, but I bet this little gun would make a sweet rocket-launcher, and would reduce the already-low flip to about nothing.

And besides, I happen to know there's at least one regular on here that's also on 22tcm.net  ;)
I know that TCM is more expensive, but if you reload it'd be more economical.  I think that it's a pretty neat cartridge.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: mr220v on January 26, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
Setting this gun up to shoot anything but 9mm will drive up ammo costs. 

The shorter tcm round is a good idea.  Just a barrel change.  Maybe a spring change.  Would probably bring muzzle flip down to almost nothing.
Title: Re: No folks, I lieth not
Post by: Chokejug on January 26, 2018, 12:56:00 PM
Hey, the more I hear, the better the TCM idea sounds!

With the "short magazine load", (for Glocks, Bobergs, etc), the feed problems with the lousy magaznes might just go completely away.

At SD range, it should perform at least as good and likely better than the FN 5/7!

And if the bullet dont "get 'em", the muzzle blast will!