Now I'm going to preface this by saying "It's cool if you're excited by this. I'm not calling you stupid for liking this pistol."
But honestly? I had an immediate and visceral dislike for this gun the moment I laid eyes upon it, and the last time I felt that strongly about something on first glance it was 2009 and it had been announced that Matt Smith was replacing David Tennant as the Doctor.
What’s weird, though, is that many folks think a Glock is ugly, while I appreciate that aesthetic. It’s not a pretty gun, mind you; but it looks functional and dangerous in that Teutonic way, so my brain goes “Looks like gun. Is gun. Is good.”
The R-51, though, looks too much like a toy for my tastes. I think it looks like a Makarov roofied a Walther PPK and this is their fugly, retarded spawn. So yes, I hate this gun.
Look, I'm sure that it will operate just fine; Remington is a reliable brand. And the price point of $389 is more than affordable. But it's an ugly gun with a low magazine capacity (7+1), and these flaws aren't redeemed by a low price tag.
In short, it seems like it's a 9mm built expressly for people who want to carry .380 sized pistols. And I suppose I can get behind that -- if all you can carry is a small .380, you want the most powerful round you can find, and so why not find a way to cram a 9mm into a .380 frame?
Of course, knowing how painfully snappy a lot of .380s are due to their size, I have to wonder how pleasant it would be to fire a larger cartridge through a similarly-sized gun. I suppose it being of all-metal construction will help mitigate the snap somewhat.
There really isn't any purpose to this post other than to act as a counterpoint to all the gunnies who seem to think this is awesome.
Meh. Bah humbug. Phooey!
PDF
