Anyone remember or care about the R51?

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I saw this thread and I was like "Are you on drugs? Who doesn't remember and LOVE that beast??? That was one of the last great widowmakers, and easily among the most inspired designs from that company in recent memory."

Then I read the thread and I was like "oh."

[ST911]

I had one in my hand the other day. I'll shoot it soon. Grip had an odd feel to it. Trigger was short, light, and a little mushy. I had to make a small tweak to my grip for the grip safety. Felt heavy for its size, but with a good balance. Looking at it overall, I was left with little more than "why?"

[Tamara]

I'll wind up buying one at some point because...

[Willard]

The R51 is another unnecessary reminder of my fascination with a recurring enigma. The fact that we live in a time heralded as technologically unsurpassed and with an unparalleled engineering prowess and manufacturing capability. Apparently, there is nothing we can't do better....with the sole exception of building stuff as well as we could 100 years or even longer ago. Is there anyone who would not prefer an original Remington 51 to the new and improved R51? An older pinned and recessed, non-MIM, no-lock, one piece barrel (why would we even have to say that) S&W revolver to current production? Colt can't even make a double action revolver or rimfire semi-auto these days (not because of quality, but cost). There is a recurring penchant to proclaim that manufacturing certain items is cost prohibitive. Yet,why doesn't technology permit replicas that equal the old hand crafted with even more quality at a lower price? Instead, we get discernibly cheaper and lower quality substitutes.

We probably couldn't build the pyramids today, yet thousands of years ago, they did it without the superior technology we rave about. Better seems to imply not better, but cheaper. Measurements and calibrations are supposed to be more precise and accurate, and they may be, but they don't seem to replicate hand craftsmanship by an artisan. This is what rules how we live. We say things are "better" or "superior." Most times, the things I'm interested in are not better, just cheaper and more easily replaced. A disposable world for disposable people perhaps.

[Tamara]

....with the sole exception of building stuff as well as we could 100 years or even longer ago

There is absolutely no question that we could build an R51 that equals or surpasses the original in quality. You want an $800-$1,000+ single stack gun not quite small enough to fit in your pocket? Get a few thousand of your friends to to put down 100% deposits along with you and we'll get you hooked up.

We probably couldn't build the pyramids today...

That is just so much arrant bullshit that it's not worth rebutting.

[Sigfan26]

I'd buy a R1 before the R51...

And I wouldn't buy the R1.

Not even the 6" 10Mm R1?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Willard]

There is absolutely no question that we could build an R51 that equals or surpasses the original in quality. You want an $800-$1,000+ single stack gun not quite small enough to fit in your pocket? Get a few thousand of your friends to to put down 100% deposits along with you and we'll get you hooked up.

Are you suggesting technology cannot maintain quality while lowering cost? So we must receive lower quality for cost maintenance or reduction? Despite our technology?

You're right. That's what I was saying (bypassing any incendiary statements) ...

I also forgot that the inventors of yesteryear required 100% deposits before they invented or invested as was the case with the original Remington 51s...correct?

[LockedBreech]

The R51 is another unnecessary reminder of my fascination with a recurring enigma. The fact that we live in a time heralded as technologically unsurpassed and with an unparalleled engineering prowess and manufacturing capability. Apparently, there is nothing we can't do better....with the sole exception of building stuff as well as we could 100 years or even longer ago. Is there anyone who would not prefer an original Remington 51 to the new and improved R51? An older pinned and recessed, non-MIM, no-lock, one piece barrel (why would we even have to say that) S&W revolver to current production? Colt can't even make a double action revolver or rimfire semi-auto these days (not because of quality, but cost). There is a recurring penchant to proclaim that manufacturing certain items is cost prohibitive. Yet,why doesn't technology permit replicas that equal the old hand crafted with even more quality at a lower price? Instead, we get discernibly cheaper and lower quality substitutes.

We probably couldn't build the pyramids today, yet thousands of years ago, they did it without the superior technology we rave about. Better seems to imply not better, but cheaper. Measurements and calibrations are supposed to be more precise and accurate, and they may be, but they don't seem to replicate hand craftsmanship by an artisan. This is what rules how we live. We say things are "better" or "superior." Most times, the things I'm interested in are not better, just cheaper and more easily replaced. A disposable world for disposable people perhaps.

While I understand the frustration with shoddy, poor quality goods, that's a cost thing, not an ability thing. We can build laser weapons and spacecraft. There is nothing that has been made or built that we couldn't make or build better, if money isn't an object.

Thing is, money is an object.

Edit: Didn't see your follow-up post. I think the number produced isn't an issue. It's the question of whether a profit can be made. Look at the miracles that are produced all the time when there's fat money behind it. Our new aircraft carriers use electromagnetic catapults, have twin nuclear reactors, and are futureproofed for laser and hypersonic weaponry. And we're gonna make more of 'em! For about $30 billion.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I also forgot that the inventors of yesteryear required 100% deposits before they invented or invested as was the case with the original Remington 51s...correct?

The fact that, decades ago, an oddball thousand-dollar single stack non-pocket-pistol non-service-pistol could potentially turn a profit isn't a good indication that it could now.

[Willard]

I get it locked breech. I know there is a lot of cool stuff going on in the world (witness the space program, computers, internet, et al). Point is, why are things now cost prohibitive that were not with earlier technology? Shouldn't we be able to make things as good at a lower cost? I'll leave it alone, apparently my expectations for technology are troubling for some.