Remington R51?

>Remington
>good

Pick one

>>33292489
If I could sum it up for you the general feeling is that reviews still seem sketchy. It's either great for 100s of rounds or dogshit .

>>33292501
The problem is a lot of the guys saying it's dogshit are complete shills. Hence my thread here.

>>33292489
MAC did a review of the gen 2, confirming it is still absolute garbage and to be used strictly as a malfunction clearing drill pistol. Remington are the laughing stock of the firearms industry.

>>33292518
If all the shills agree on your gun being shit, you got a problem.

>>33292523
And yet they make more than the next 5 largest gun companies combined in America.

>>33292489

Have held one. Just don't like the finish and the feel. Might be a good gun but it's not something I'd see myself owning.

However, I have owned one of the original steel frame guns of yesteryear and those were pretty damn nice.

>>33292489
Bro steer clear of anything Remington. There are videos on youtube of the new 51's and they still have issues. Remington is bad news.

>>33292489
The production models seem to still have issues. Something about the barrel locking mechanism wearing itself out of spec.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-13-17-17-37.png (99KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1280x720px

>>33295145
They're in third actually

>>33296201
So who are these morons buying all these new remingtons? I've never owned any of their guns but I bought a box of 9mm from them and it left my Browning Hi Power covered it soot after only 50 rounds. Whenever I see something that says Remington on it I just don't buy it.

File: I want to die.png (177KB, 500x269px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 500x269px

>tfw it'll be another 90 years before they re-remake

>>33296386
People who either have used pre-'90's Remingtons that were good or who have friends or family members recommend them after using pre-'90's Remingtons that were good.

I mean, as an FFL employee, I see a LOOOOOOT of new guns. Not a super high volume seller, but still probably 2400 different guns a month.

Fully half of all Remingtons we receive have *something* visibly wrong with them. Most of it's minor, like guns coming out of their factory box with dings and dents or splotchy finishes or burrs. But occasionally we get a royally fucked gun, like the R700 Sendero SFII we got that looked like its scope base mounting holes had been freehanded with a pocketknife, or the 870 Express that had a totally crushed barrel in a pristine box, or the *three* empty boxes we've gotten, or the 700 Police that didn't have a chamber reamed at all.

That literally doesn't happen with any other manufacturer we carry (we don't carry Lorcin/Jennings/Raven/Bryco/MPA). Ever. The next worst I've had come through the shop was a Mossberg Patriot coimbo whose cheapshit chink scope had a fleck in the objective lens coating.

>>33296386
Many people buy guns and don't shoot them.

>>33295659
Wouldn't hat imply they're functioning for 100s of rounds?

>>33297358
They do.

Just not in a row.

>>33292489

They're garbage, OP.

The originals are pretty complicated and Remington simply can't or isn't willing to recreate it properly.

>>33297778
Remington doesn't own any brands though. Cerberus does, and Freedom Group owns that.

And if you wanna play that game, ATK owns Winchester, S&W, Colt, Browning, Mossberg, Savage, and FNH-USA.

>>33296201
>>33296201
wonder what the 39 Shotguns S&W made were

>>33298231
Probably the rehash of the Model 1000, which was a 1:1 clone of the Remington 1100 produced under license from 1974-1980 then "refreshed" in 2007 but not taken to market until 2013. It was a total flop since it was basically an 11-87 but retailed for close to $1500 instead of the 11-87's ~$600, and was only available with a 30" barrel. It's also speculated to have durability issues since they decided to lighten the refresh a lot by swapping to an aluminum alloy frame and thinning the barrel a LOT.

>>33298231
A quick search shows both S&W and Ruger make O/U shotguns. That either company makes shotguns was surprising to me as well.

>>33292489

Bought one in December because I like mechanically unique shit. Haven't fired it (bought 5 guns since the last time I went shooting, jesus christ), but fully expect it to be shit

>>33292489
Feed angle is still shit.

>>33297019
As a fellow funstore employee, I can back up this claim. Remington only sells because of the name. About the only thing I can say for Remington is at least they figured out how to keep the foreend from wobbling all over the fucking place and clanking about. We won't name names, but it rhymes with Mossberg.