Anyone remember or care about the R51?

[Willard]

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.

Not advocating it should now. Just saying the original is better than current version. If they pulled it off then, why can't the current version do better now, and not be cost prohibitive to do so...technology and all? That is all. I'm out.

[LockedBreech]

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.

Nothing about your expectations "troubles" me, you just seem to have something of a misunderstanding of the role of technology and mass production versus cost/quality.

Simple answer: We can do more, but it's pricier and we generally can't do it by hand, and as the manual labor market has reduced, the cost of certain types of labor (hand-fitting, hand-carving) has increased.

An example is a typical lawn chair. For centuries, a lawn or deck chair was made of wood and nails by hand. Now we can make them by the thousands out of plastic. You pay a lot more for a handmade one, even though it's technically older technology. You're not paying for the materials anymore, you're paying for the methodology and tastes of the market.

[Drang]

IOW, why do revolvers cost more than semi-autos?

[Totem Polar]

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."

Dude. Did you know that some guy bought the rights to the Vincent motorcycle company in the mid 90s and developed a new black lightning based on the RC51? It was all set to launch and then the guy died in a motorcycle accident. No shit.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

*Slow fap*

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk

[farscott]

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.

The big change in manufacturing in the last one hundred years is that the skilled labor went from being plentiful and inexpensive to being scarce and expensive while at the same time machines went from scarce and expensive to plentiful and inexpensive. The literal "rise of machines" in manufacturing changes how parts are being made and how parts go together. There is a huge amount of effort dedicated to allowing "sumdood" literally off the street with minimal training to assemble something because "sumdood" is all you get for $15.00 per hour, and products reflect that effort. Contrast that with the "glory years" when skilled workers finished machining gun parts and assembled them with care. Of course, parts between two guns may or may not interchange, but the parts that were fit to each other in the same gun were amazing. Usually.

On the R51 subject, I have talked with more than one person that works in the new facility in Huntsville, AL. Morale there is not very good as the employees feel like they are just expected to know how to build guns when many of them have very little or no previous manufacturing experience. It also does not help that some of the employees are gun guys, and the management is not asking their opinions on new products. It seems everyone wants to provide marketing input and gets mad when told to do the job one was hired to perform.

The other issue, adjusting for inflation, is that modern pistols are inexpensive. In 1936, Colt sold 1911A1 pistols to the government for $24.65 per pistol. Remington Rand charged $39.93 each in 1941. Using the BLS "official statistics" with the official CPI, $39.93 in 1941 is $653.68. If we use an average inflation rate of 5% per year, that $39.93 becomes $1550.59. A 2016-built Colt 1911 is half the price and twice the pistol.

[JCS]

It was a little worse than I originally said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe in PNG]

There's also a fair bit of survivorship bias when one praises the quality craftsmanship of the days of yore.
The stuff you are seeing today looks more impressive because you are looking at the good stuff.
A large amount of the Friday/Monday rubbish was thrown away or recycled long ago.

[Hambo]

Get a few thousand of your friends to to put down 100% deposits along with you and we'll get you hooked up.

Even that wouldn't get it done. Several years ago someone set out to build new large frame Merwin-Hulberts. I had serious wood for one, but not serious enough to throw down full price in advance of production models. Good thing too, because the company never got off the ground.

As for R51's new or old, I'm out. Dillinger carried a Colt, not a Remington.

[Hauptmann]

The only way I would shoot a R51 at this point would be if someone would gave me one to demo and that included free ammo(not worth wasting my own on it). Remington quality has been abysmal in the last few years, and there is no way that I would throw away my money on anything that their corporation has influence over. They have become cancer in the firearms industry.