Thanks for this video, with the "release" of the R51 I've been interested by the Pedersen design. I'm impressed, at 12:15 when you start shooting back to back, the Model 51 has very low muzzle rise and ran far more reliably
In the USA, Colt was making the Browning designed Model 1903 Pocket Hammerless (.32 ACP) and the Model 1908 Pocket Hammerless (.380) which were the predecessors to the Model 1910. The 1910 wrapped the recoil spring around the barrel rather than placing it under the barrel and this resulted in a sleeker pistol. Yugoslavia wanted to adopt the pistol for the military but required a longer barrel and wanted more magazine capacity. Yugoslavia, ironically, was formed out of the former Austro-Hungarian empire after WW1 which had begun following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian... armed with a Browning/FN Model 1910. Browning responded with the Model 1922, also sometimes called the Model 10/22, which used a longer grip frame and an extension to the slide to enclose a longer barrel. Several other countries went on to adopt the Model 1922 as a military and/or police pistol including Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Netherlands, Romania and Turkey. Germany used them during WW2 when they occupied Belgium and took over the production of the FN factory. After WW2, when Colt had discontinued the Models 1903 and 1908, Remington and Savage no longer made their .380s, but Walther (PPK) and Mauser (HSc) were selling a good number of .380s, mostly for the off-duty police role at the time, Browning began importing the Model 1910 under the "Browning" name as the "Model 1955". That is the gun you are shooting in this video. The Model 1955 was banned from import by the GCA '68 as it was too small in height and length to meet the import restrictions...the same fate befell the Walther PPK. Walther developed the PPK/s to overcome the restrictions and Browning handled this by importing the Model 1910 as the "Model 1971" which was actually the Model 1922 with adjustable sights installed, which looked rather strange and kind of ruined the whole "pocket pistol" idea. The Model 1971 was not commercially successful and was discontinued after just 3 years. I have a Browning Model 1910 .380 and really like the pistol. It is reliable for me with brass cased, FMJ/RN bullets and not too reliable with anything else. It was a hand-me-down from my father, so I won't be selling it. I occasionally carry it as a "tuxedo gun" for formal occasions, it is very slim and trim and easy to conceal. More than a few times I carried it in an off-duty role or as a back-up gun during my 36 year career as a police officer, though it was never my "every day carry" gun. My main compliant with the design (other than it is is so choosy about ammo) is that the grip safety requires a really firm hold to make sure it is deactivated. It pivots at the bottom rather than the top (like a 1911) and unless the gun is held right, it may not work...at least in my hands. I think both the Browning and Remington are really attractive, very nice guns. Now we have much lighter, cheaper and even smaller .380 pistols for concealed carry and I use a S&W Bodyguard .380 as my "always be armed" gun for when I will be wearing very light clothes and it would be difficult to conceal one of my preferred carry guns. Thanks for the video on a couple of very nice, classic handguns!
Good info all around the 10/22 is on my want list. I've handled a few, but people are wanting Tiffany prices for junk guns. I'll correct one thing you said, but otherwise it's accurate. The model 71 was not just a 10/22. I believe it had the shorter grip of the 1910 or 1955 as the case may be. There was a magazine extension to make the gun look taller, but the frame was identical to the shorter 1910/55. Also, the slide was made as one piece rather than having the extension made as a separate piece. I will echo and agree that the grip safety is horrible. I don't think it needs to be as my Ortgies and Remington 51 pistols also have the bottom-pivot and they are easy to depress. The main problem for me is that the gun is so small I have little hand strength left to grip it. Same problem I have with the Vest Pocket. I have a really tough time pulling the trigger back that far while simultaneously depressing the grip safety. I do have a pair of nice CZ Duo pistols that solve this problem nicely. Haven't made a video about these or the excellent CZ-45 either.
I've owned a Browning FN 1955 .380 for many years, it was my grandfathers. I always thought the gun was designed for smaller hands. He might have purchased it for my grandmother... Took me the longest time to learn how to take it down and clean it as it differed from the previous model significantly. I sincerely appreciate your video reviews and take down instructions. Cheers. ~ S ~
My dad left me a model 1910 in 32 Auto. But it's a bit beat up. The plastic grip is a little chipped away from a corner and a few minor scratches on the gun. It also has a threated barrel and seems to have some wear and tear on the threat ring cover thingy.
The threaded barrel is interesting. Threaded 1910's are not very common in the USA. I would be interested in seeing what the barrel looked like and how it was threaded. There are a few methods for doing that.
How do The grips feel when firing one handed as most people did in the early days. 1890-1970. In general did that change how you felt about the guns comfort?
The uncomfortable part of firing the gun wasn't how many hands I was using, it was the grip angle and the requirement to squeeze the small grip in a specific way to depress the grip safety. I do fire the gun one-handed and it is certainly not better. I grew up shooting bullseye with a 1911. I am adept at firing a pistol one-handed when the situation arises.
The Colt 1903 is a fantastic pistol. I think it is still a valid design that could be made today, much as the 1911 is. My 1903 is pretty rough, but I hope to do a video on it someday. Spoiler alert, though, I enjoy shooting it more than the 1910. Still love the Remington 51 more, however taking it apart is a bit of a pain and they are worth twice as much as my 1903... so there is that. The Sauer 38H is a much more modern design that I prefer to any other of its type including the overrated Walther PP series and the horrid Mauser HSC. Again, for those, hopefully videos in the future. I'll have to find a Walther PPK to borrow as I won't own one.
Blowback guns use the weight of the slide AND the resistance of the recoil spring to SLOW the opening of the slide. A lighter slide requires a heavier spring. The heavier spring will SLOW the speed of the slide, and use recoil energy to compress the spring. It also makes it more difficult to operate the slide by hand. You are correct to surmise that a higher slide velocity would result in more felt recoil, but it is incorrect to assume that the slide velocity is higher because it is a blowback or because the slide is lighter. Using tour example, a Hi Point .380 should kick more than my locked breech S&W M&P .380 Bodyguard. I assure you, that is not the case. A LOT of factors go into the perceived recoil of any particular gun/cartridge combination. Being a blowback or locked breech recoil operated handgun has little to do with it. I have a Browning Model 1955 (the same gun you test here). It is very reliable with quality .380 FMJ ammo. I have never tried it with old Bolshevik firecrackers, but it has not been as reliable with modern hollow points. They were not a "thing" at that time. Few .380 hollow points actually expand from short barreled guns anyway. (there are a few exceptions) I do not use mine for every day carry. But it is a classic and I love it.
A Hi-Point .380 of the same slide weight as a locked-breach .380 will always kick more. I think you've gone through and picked and chosen my words to imply that I was saying something I was not. I have listened to myself and I do not find any fault in what I said. Some of it is in layman's terms, but I understand the basic and advanced physics involved. I disagree with several of your points, but I do not have the time of patience to do it meticulously. I also do not HATE the Browning 1910 design. For its time, it was the second-best handgun you could buy in the world and the best in Europe. The BEST handgun in the world was and would remain the Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless. This would hold true until the mid-30's. My opinion though.
I always liked the Model 51. Enough to own two. Besides the terrible sights there isn't much to complain about with it. Yes its a pain in the ass to strip- but is cool, wierd and a great shooter. If it wouldn't be for the sights I would have no problem carrying one as an EDC option.
If Remington wanted ergonomics , they should have looked no further than DWM and the Luger. It was and still is one of the most naturally pointing semi automatic pistols ever made, even by today's standards.
I intend to do a video on ergonomics in the future. Luger (and Bill Ruger later on) chose a grip angle that has fallen out of favor recently. It is the 'relaxed' grip. That is, when you relax your hand, the sights align with the Luger grip angle. If you tighten your arm as in when you make a fist, then the 20-degree grip angle of the Pedersen design lines up the sights. The UA-camr FortuneCookie45LC has some good videos on this as well. Pedersen did, in fact, study both the 1911 (around 18 degrees) and the Luger (around 22 degrees). He made wooden models and sampled Remington employees. In the end, he settled for about 20 degrees. Pedersen's friend, Julian Hatcher, worked for Army Ordnance and when the 1911 was updated to the A1 standard, they included an arched mainspring housing the rake the grip a little more so that it was near the 20 degrees of the Pedersen gun. This is no coincidence. That said, it is a personal preference. John Browning preferred a steeper grip angle and you can see this grip angle in virtually all of his designs. It was the Army that insisted on the grip angle change from the 1905 to the M1910 (carried forward to the M1911).
Have you ever handled a Model 51? They ain't bad. Especially by 1917 standards. They are better, far better in fact than many small wonder 9s and 380s made today
Seems as you say , the 51 was designed as a point and shoot , nicer , But the 55 maybe was designed as a lift and shoot quick , from the hip or chest or wherever .
No, the 1955 was designed by John Browning and it has the classic Browning grip angle. ALL of his designs prior to the P35 had the same upright grip angle. The reason you see the 1911 without that angle is that the Ordnance Department of the US Army dictated the grip angle. It would be nice to have a better explanation other than "Browning liked it that way" but there you have it. Stock designs by Browning also featured an unusual amount of drop. He was a tall and gangly man at 6'4" tall and nobody needed question his idea of ergonomics at the time. Pedersen, on the other hand, was a pioneer in Ergonomics and took great pains to get a comfortable grip shape and angle.
It's your money. There are MANY variations of the 1910 that vary in value and collector interest. I have been looking for a decent 1910/22 for over a decade now.
I collect old semi-automatics. I also shoot them. I have a Model 51 and a Model 1955. Remington & Browning respectively. My understanding is that the last Model 51 was made in 1935. Compared to the other guns of its time, including the Colt 1903 and the Browning 1910 (almost the same gun as the 1955), The model 51 was head and shoulders above and far ahead of it's time Look at the model 1955. It still had the clunky clip release, not the button release the Remington model 51 had (way ahead of the others). The model 1955 not only has more felt recoil (I load my own [4 gr Unique, topped with a 95 gr slug] but the trigger hurts my finger when firing multiple clips:not so with the Model 51. The Model 51 is slimmer. It has a back strap safety, and a safety on-off. So, all one needs to do, with a round in the chamber!, is to flip off the safety, and fire! [Which is quicker than pulling back the hammer and fire on a single action.] Also, the first round fired is like a single action hammer already pulled, unlike a modern Kahr.] I also have an Ortiges .32 ACP. It is neat, but the Model 51 (all pre-war BTW) was far superior and far ahead of it's time. At this year's SHOT Show (2014), Remington announced the re-appearance of the Model 51. However, with the safety requirements, I'm not sure how good it will be. I'm so pro Model 51, all others are second class.
Old pistols are fine. If you're subscribed to the channel, there will probably be an Ortgies video upcoming. I have two. Of all the period .380's, the Remington 51 is hands down the best. Worlds better than anything on the market until the Sauer 38H was introduced. You are correct about the 1935 date for the last Model 51 to leave the factory, however the last gun was serialized in 1929 and it is believed that production was all but halted at that point. It took them six years to finish assembling the pistols they had parts produced for. If you look at what was happening at that point in history, especially with gun companies, it is no wonder that the 51 was dropped.
+RyeOnHam My understanding was/is that Colt approached Remington back in the late 20s and paid them $100K to simply not manufacture any more of them because Colt wanted the US military to adopt their 1908 and by paying Remington to stop they had no more real US competition.
Ken ibn Anak In my research, that is not what happened. The Colt 1908 was and is a better-made, more sturdy gun. Not quite as interesting, but still a good gun. Remington made guns up till about '26 or '27 and then ceased production around the time of the stock market crash. They continued to assemble guns up to the mid-1930's but demand for pocket pistols had dwindled greatly around that time. Restarting production did not make sense.
Actually the earlier pre-WWII Colt 1908s because of the over narrow ejector and improper spacing of the magazine lips were in my opinion inferior weapons. No one except the Shanghai Municipal Police was firing them a lot, but the problem was serious enough there a department wide modification of them was done. Colt was notified of the problems found in 1934, but took no action to address it until the US Navy began returning their own1908s in January 1845. Colt eventually confirmed the Shanghai Police finding and fixed the problem with a new ejector gage and the Model M pistol was the result. Still all in all the Remington M-51 has a much more natural grip angle and first time shooters I have allowed to try mine do much better with the Remington than they do with the Colt.
Ken ibn Anak I am about the biggest fan of the model 51 as there exists, however I can tell you that the bolts were fragile and cost of production was higher. I love the Model 51 and an improved version of the 51 would certainly have been a better gun than the Colt 1908. The market just was not there. For Pedersen's first (and last) attempt at a pistol, you can't knock it. By the time Remington started producing the 51, John Browning had already produced, what, 15 different pistol designs? He held all the patents for the best systems and Pedersen had to eat table scraps at the design table.
Just looking at the Remington, one can see that John Browning had a great influence on the design of it. Browning supposedly called Pedersen the "greatest gun designer in the world". But, I think we all know who really bears that title.
Browning was likely being modest. Yes, it would be difficult to overstate the influence John Moses Browning has had on virtually all firearms on the market today. The AK-47, for instance, borrows heavily from the Browning-designed Remington Model 8. Pedersen was in a bad position trying to design mechanisms that had not yet been dreamed up by Browning. By coincidence, Browning worked for Remington for a time developing a handful of designs including the Model 8 and the Model 17 (later to be copied by Ithaca, Mossberg, and High Standard). Pedersen and Browning shared patents for the Model 17. The quote from Browning about Pedersen appears in the writings of Julian Hatcher, a man who was good friends with both men.
RyeOnHam Apparently, Browning even put himself in that same "bad position" when he began designing the Hi-power. Having sold the 1911 patents to Colt, Browning had to essentially redesign the semi-auto for a second time. It seems to me, that the newer polymer guns have more in common with the Hi-power than with the 1911. I'm sure Pedersen learned A LOT from the exposure to Browning's semi-auto concepts, and probably vice-versa. I happen to own two of Browning's semi-auto patented firearms: A MINT condition 1941 Remington model 11 (12) gauge. And, of course, a new manufacture S.A. 1911 A1. I do also own the ubiquitous 1894 Winchester rifle, but that's another era all together.
MASTER deBATER. There are stories floating around about the P35 and that Browning was working on the design the day he died. Well, that was in 1926. Dieudonné Saive took over the project at an early stage and had a more significant influence on the design than is often stated. Saive was a master in his own right but he walked in the shadow of Giants early in his career.
RyeOnHam Yea, I think you're right. If I'm not mistaken, it was Saive who designed the double stack magazine, that was later copied by EVERYONE. Often people credit Glock for the advancements in the auto-pistol world. But Saive's magazine might have been the most important breakthrough. Other than the striker fire trigger and the light weight materials, Glocks are not much of an advancement on the p-35.
Glock did absolutely nothing new... but he did that 'nothing new' in a most excellent manner. I cannot name a single innovation Glock can take credit for. It was his execution of the innovations of others, brought together in a tidy package that made him great. Yes, Saive designed the magazine prior to the pistol. It was given to "The Master", as FN employees referred to Browning, and Browning designed two pistols for it. The locked-breech design was the one that Saive completed. It would have been done sooner, but the military contracts kept changing their lists of requirements.
Thanks for comparing two guns I have, both of which I completely disassembled, cleaned/lubed, and put back together. All I had back then was the NRA manual. They were both a giant PIA. I would really like to see complete frame disassembly of the 51. It's possible to assemble it with the disconnector in backwards. Won't work.
I have detail stripped the model 51 several times. I would not recommend it to anybody. Over the years, I just kind of do it. Don't need a guide to think about it. You get to know intuitively how a part comes out and how to get it back in. I will not be posting any complete disassembly videos unless something changes. I do plan to get a few more videos out, but my channel is demonetized. Hard to justify putting time and effort into it. Back to a hobby. For a while, I was making enough money on the channel that I could justify a video every two weeks or so. Now, I figured it's about three months per video, and that's if I work minimum wage and buy the gas and ammo myself. So, I'm only doing videos that appeal to me and what I am already doing. If you think the Remington 51 is a bugger, try the Remington models 12 and 14. WOW!
@@RyeOnHam Back then, I had a practice of taking every new gun completely apart. I was quite intuitive mechanically. I took a Baby Browning, totally apart, and then realized they must have fixtures and special tools. I got it back together perfectly though. Once, I had to take apart 1 side of a box lock shotgun for some reason. Miracle I got that back together. I was quite an amateur gunsmith, I had very nice tools, files and stones etc. My hands are very weak now, I'm not sure about removing the slide from my 51, but I just got it, and I wanna clean and lube, especially the recoiling bolt. Thanks for your videos. If you don't do it, some butcher will. I have seen terrible things done to some guns.
I recently purchased a Browning 1955 in .380. I bought it because it was in excellent condition and because it is a Browning. I took it to the range & ran some Tula steel case ammo thru it. It ran 100% - zero issues. As you indicated, the sights are almost non existent, but point shooting it went fairly well. It too tended to shoot low, but at 15 to 15 yards, all bullets were on the 8" x 10" target. Even managed to put 3 or 4 shots in the bullseye. I am definitely a Remington fan and would love to find a Remington model 51. I'll agree that the Remington is probably a better pistol, but I've not found one yet. Great review!
Well, not entirely. The Remington 51 uses a 'hesitation' lock. Blowback for about 1/8 of an inch, then it operates like a locked breech SKS rifle. The slide moves while the bolt remains in place.
Thanks for this video, with the "release" of the R51 I've been interested by the Pedersen design.
I'm impressed, at 12:15 when you start shooting back to back, the Model 51 has very low muzzle rise and ran far more reliably
I have a R51... Second gen. It really is an awesome shooter. All metal construction (plastic trigger 😢) stainless slide with aluminum frame.
In the USA, Colt was making the Browning designed Model 1903 Pocket Hammerless (.32 ACP) and the Model 1908 Pocket Hammerless (.380) which were the predecessors to the Model 1910.
The 1910 wrapped the recoil spring around the barrel rather than placing it under the barrel and this resulted in a sleeker pistol.
Yugoslavia wanted to adopt the pistol for the military but required a longer barrel and wanted more magazine capacity. Yugoslavia, ironically, was formed out of the former Austro-Hungarian empire after WW1 which had begun following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian... armed with a Browning/FN Model 1910.
Browning responded with the Model 1922, also sometimes called the Model 10/22, which used a longer grip frame and an extension to the slide to enclose a longer barrel. Several other countries went on to adopt the Model 1922 as a military and/or police pistol including Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Netherlands, Romania and Turkey. Germany used them during WW2 when they occupied Belgium and took over the production of the FN factory.
After WW2, when Colt had discontinued the Models 1903 and 1908, Remington and Savage no longer made their .380s, but Walther (PPK) and Mauser (HSc) were selling a good number of .380s, mostly for the off-duty police role at the time, Browning began importing the Model 1910 under the "Browning" name as the "Model 1955". That is the gun you are shooting in this video.
The Model 1955 was banned from import by the GCA '68 as it was too small in height and length to meet the import restrictions...the same fate befell the Walther PPK.
Walther developed the PPK/s to overcome the restrictions and Browning handled this by importing the Model 1910 as the "Model 1971" which was actually the Model 1922 with adjustable sights installed, which looked rather strange and kind of ruined the whole "pocket pistol" idea.
The Model 1971 was not commercially successful and was discontinued after just 3 years.
I have a Browning Model 1910 .380 and really like the pistol. It is reliable for me with brass cased, FMJ/RN bullets and not too reliable with anything else. It was a hand-me-down from my father, so I won't be selling it. I occasionally carry it as a "tuxedo gun" for formal occasions, it is very slim and trim and easy to conceal. More than a few times I carried it in an off-duty role or as a back-up gun during my 36 year career as a police officer, though it was never my "every day carry" gun. My main compliant with the design (other than it is is so choosy about ammo) is that the grip safety requires a really firm hold to make sure it is deactivated. It pivots at the bottom rather than the top (like a 1911) and unless the gun is held right, it may not work...at least in my hands.
I think both the Browning and Remington are really attractive, very nice guns. Now we have much lighter, cheaper and even smaller .380 pistols for concealed carry and I use a S&W Bodyguard .380 as my "always be armed" gun for when I will be wearing very light clothes and it would be difficult to conceal one of my preferred carry guns.
Thanks for the video on a couple of very nice, classic handguns!
Good info all around the 10/22 is on my want list. I've handled a few, but people are wanting Tiffany prices for junk guns. I'll correct one thing you said, but otherwise it's accurate. The model 71 was not just a 10/22. I believe it had the shorter grip of the 1910 or 1955 as the case may be. There was a magazine extension to make the gun look taller, but the frame was identical to the shorter 1910/55. Also, the slide was made as one piece rather than having the extension made as a separate piece.
I will echo and agree that the grip safety is horrible. I don't think it needs to be as my Ortgies and Remington 51 pistols also have the bottom-pivot and they are easy to depress. The main problem for me is that the gun is so small I have little hand strength left to grip it. Same problem I have with the Vest Pocket. I have a really tough time pulling the trigger back that far while simultaneously depressing the grip safety. I do have a pair of nice CZ Duo pistols that solve this problem nicely. Haven't made a video about these or the excellent CZ-45 either.
Kapsamlı bir bilgi çok teşekkür ederim. Türkiye'den saygılarımla
@@ozcansezer1950 You're welcome!
I had one of the original Remington M51 .380 pistols. They are fantastic little pistols.
I've owned a Browning FN 1955 .380 for many years, it was my grandfathers. I always thought the gun was designed for smaller hands. He might have purchased it for my grandmother... Took me the longest time to learn how to take it down and clean it as it differed from the previous model significantly. I sincerely appreciate your video reviews and take down instructions. Cheers. ~ S ~
What's it worth?
Thanks for the explanation about the connection between slide weight/velocity and transfer of recoil energy to the hand.
I have a browning FN 1922 model in 32acp, easy to take down and clean can't figure out exact date though. Any ideas how to find date of manufacture.
I'd have to google it.
Thank you. Nice to know if I buy one.
I was looking for the FN. “10 or 22 “
We’ll see. Nothing in my local shops.
I saw a 22 in a pawn shop in Oklahoma recently. It wasn't in very good shape. Still looking.
I liked your size comparison with the FN 1910. I didn't realize the 1910 was that much shorter.
@@KungFuHonky Yeah, she is a small one.
My dad left me a model 1910 in 32 Auto. But it's a bit beat up. The plastic grip is a little chipped away from a corner and a few minor scratches on the gun. It also has a threated barrel and seems to have some wear and tear on the threat ring cover thingy.
The threaded barrel is interesting. Threaded 1910's are not very common in the USA. I would be interested in seeing what the barrel looked like and how it was threaded. There are a few methods for doing that.
How do The grips feel when firing one handed as most people did in the early days. 1890-1970. In general did that change how you felt about the guns comfort?
The uncomfortable part of firing the gun wasn't how many hands I was using, it was the grip angle and the requirement to squeeze the small grip in a specific way to depress the grip safety. I do fire the gun one-handed and it is certainly not better. I grew up shooting bullseye with a 1911. I am adept at firing a pistol one-handed when the situation arises.
Fantastic video. Thank you very much. How do they compare to the Colts 1903 pocket hammerless?
The Colt 1903 is a fantastic pistol. I think it is still a valid design that could be made today, much as the 1911 is. My 1903 is pretty rough, but I hope to do a video on it someday. Spoiler alert, though, I enjoy shooting it more than the 1910. Still love the Remington 51 more, however taking it apart is a bit of a pain and they are worth twice as much as my 1903... so there is that. The Sauer 38H is a much more modern design that I prefer to any other of its type including the overrated Walther PP series and the horrid Mauser HSC. Again, for those, hopefully videos in the future. I'll have to find a Walther PPK to borrow as I won't own one.
How do you fix it when it jams?
I need more info than that. There are several ways the gun can jam and several methods for clearing each type of jam.
‘grip handle’ it’s called a Grip Safety!.
Blowback guns use the weight of the slide AND the resistance of the recoil spring to SLOW the opening of the slide. A lighter slide requires a heavier spring. The heavier spring will SLOW the speed of the slide, and use recoil energy to compress the spring. It also makes it more difficult to operate the slide by hand. You are correct to surmise that a higher slide velocity would result in more felt recoil, but it is incorrect to assume that the slide velocity is higher because it is a blowback or because the slide is lighter. Using tour example, a Hi Point .380 should kick more than my locked breech S&W M&P .380 Bodyguard. I assure you, that is not the case. A LOT of factors go into the perceived recoil of any particular gun/cartridge combination. Being a blowback or locked breech recoil operated handgun has little to do with it.
I have a Browning Model 1955 (the same gun you test here). It is very reliable with quality .380 FMJ ammo. I have never tried it with old Bolshevik firecrackers, but it has not been as reliable with modern hollow points. They were not a "thing" at that time. Few .380 hollow points actually expand from short barreled guns anyway. (there are a few exceptions)
I do not use mine for every day carry. But it is a classic and I love it.
A Hi-Point .380 of the same slide weight as a locked-breach .380 will always kick more. I think you've gone through and picked and chosen my words to imply that I was saying something I was not. I have listened to myself and I do not find any fault in what I said. Some of it is in layman's terms, but I understand the basic and advanced physics involved.
I disagree with several of your points, but I do not have the time of patience to do it meticulously. I also do not HATE the Browning 1910 design. For its time, it was the second-best handgun you could buy in the world and the best in Europe. The BEST handgun in the world was and would remain the Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless. This would hold true until the mid-30's. My opinion though.
General George S. Parton owned a Remington 51. Apparently he always had 2 or 3 pistols on him at all times.
I always liked the Model 51. Enough to own two. Besides the terrible sights there isn't much to complain about with it. Yes its a pain in the ass to strip- but is cool, wierd and a great shooter. If it wouldn't be for the sights I would have no problem carrying one as an EDC option.
A pair a beautiful classic auto pistols.
Thank you and thanks for watching. I truly enjoy watching your videos.
If Remington wanted ergonomics , they should have looked no further than DWM and the Luger. It was and still is one of the most naturally pointing semi automatic pistols ever made, even by today's standards.
I intend to do a video on ergonomics in the future. Luger (and Bill Ruger later on) chose a grip angle that has fallen out of favor recently. It is the 'relaxed' grip. That is, when you relax your hand, the sights align with the Luger grip angle. If you tighten your arm as in when you make a fist, then the 20-degree grip angle of the Pedersen design lines up the sights. The UA-camr FortuneCookie45LC has some good videos on this as well. Pedersen did, in fact, study both the 1911 (around 18 degrees) and the Luger (around 22 degrees). He made wooden models and sampled Remington employees. In the end, he settled for about 20 degrees. Pedersen's friend, Julian Hatcher, worked for Army Ordnance and when the 1911 was updated to the A1 standard, they included an arched mainspring housing the rake the grip a little more so that it was near the 20 degrees of the Pedersen gun. This is no coincidence.
That said, it is a personal preference. John Browning preferred a steeper grip angle and you can see this grip angle in virtually all of his designs. It was the Army that insisted on the grip angle change from the 1905 to the M1910 (carried forward to the M1911).
Have you ever handled a Model 51? They ain't bad. Especially by 1917 standards. They are better, far better in fact than many small wonder 9s and 380s made today
@@danschneider9921
Just bought one, almost exclusively based on feel in the hand.
Seems as you say , the 51 was designed as a point and shoot , nicer ,
But the 55 maybe was designed as a lift and shoot quick , from the hip or chest or wherever .
No, the 1955 was designed by John Browning and it has the classic Browning grip angle. ALL of his designs prior to the P35 had the same upright grip angle. The reason you see the 1911 without that angle is that the Ordnance Department of the US Army dictated the grip angle. It would be nice to have a better explanation other than "Browning liked it that way" but there you have it. Stock designs by Browning also featured an unusual amount of drop. He was a tall and gangly man at 6'4" tall and nobody needed question his idea of ergonomics at the time.
Pedersen, on the other hand, was a pioneer in Ergonomics and took great pains to get a comfortable grip shape and angle.
I have a chance to buy a browning 1910 ww2 capture. should I buy it?
It's your money. There are MANY variations of the 1910 that vary in value and collector interest. I have been looking for a decent 1910/22 for over a decade now.
I collect old semi-automatics. I also shoot them. I have a Model 51 and a Model 1955. Remington & Browning respectively. My understanding is that the last Model 51 was made in 1935. Compared to the other guns of its time, including the Colt 1903 and the Browning 1910 (almost the same gun as the 1955), The model 51 was head and shoulders above and far ahead of it's time Look at the model 1955. It still had the clunky clip release, not the button release the Remington model 51 had (way ahead of the others). The model 1955 not only has more felt recoil (I load my own [4 gr Unique, topped with a 95 gr slug] but the trigger hurts my finger when firing multiple clips:not so with the Model 51. The Model 51 is slimmer. It has a back strap safety, and a safety on-off. So, all one needs to do, with a round in the chamber!, is to flip off the safety, and fire! [Which is quicker than pulling back the hammer and fire on a single action.] Also, the first round fired is like a single action hammer already pulled, unlike a modern Kahr.] I also have an Ortiges .32 ACP. It is neat, but the Model 51 (all pre-war BTW) was far superior and far ahead of it's time. At this year's SHOT Show (2014), Remington announced the re-appearance of the Model 51. However, with the safety requirements, I'm not sure how good it will be. I'm so pro Model 51, all others are second class.
Old pistols are fine. If you're subscribed to the channel, there will probably be an Ortgies video upcoming. I have two. Of all the period .380's, the Remington 51 is hands down the best. Worlds better than anything on the market until the Sauer 38H was introduced. You are correct about the 1935 date for the last Model 51 to leave the factory, however the last gun was serialized in 1929 and it is believed that production was all but halted at that point. It took them six years to finish assembling the pistols they had parts produced for. If you look at what was happening at that point in history, especially with gun companies, it is no wonder that the 51 was dropped.
+RyeOnHam My understanding was/is that Colt approached Remington back in the late 20s and paid them $100K to simply not manufacture any more of them because Colt wanted the US military to adopt their 1908 and by paying Remington to stop they had no more real US competition.
Ken ibn Anak In my research, that is not what happened. The Colt 1908 was and is a better-made, more sturdy gun. Not quite as interesting, but still a good gun. Remington made guns up till about '26 or '27 and then ceased production around the time of the stock market crash. They continued to assemble guns up to the mid-1930's but demand for pocket pistols had dwindled greatly around that time. Restarting production did not make sense.
Actually the earlier pre-WWII Colt 1908s because of the over narrow ejector and improper spacing of the magazine lips were in my opinion inferior weapons. No one except the Shanghai Municipal Police was firing them a lot, but the problem was serious enough there a department wide modification of them was done. Colt was notified of the problems found in 1934, but took no action to address it until the US Navy began returning their own1908s in January 1845. Colt eventually confirmed the Shanghai Police finding and fixed the problem with a new ejector gage and the Model M pistol was the result. Still all in all the Remington M-51 has a much more natural grip angle and first time shooters I have allowed to try mine do much better with the Remington than they do with the Colt.
Ken ibn Anak I am about the biggest fan of the model 51 as there exists, however I can tell you that the bolts were fragile and cost of production was higher. I love the Model 51 and an improved version of the 51 would certainly have been a better gun than the Colt 1908. The market just was not there. For Pedersen's first (and last) attempt at a pistol, you can't knock it. By the time Remington started producing the 51, John Browning had already produced, what, 15 different pistol designs? He held all the patents for the best systems and Pedersen had to eat table scraps at the design table.
Thanks for the awesome video RyeOnHam. Remington all the way
Thanks for watching!
Just looking at the Remington, one can see that John Browning had a great influence on the design of it. Browning supposedly called Pedersen the "greatest gun designer in the world". But, I think we all know who really bears that title.
Browning was likely being modest. Yes, it would be difficult to overstate the influence John Moses Browning has had on virtually all firearms on the market today. The AK-47, for instance, borrows heavily from the Browning-designed Remington Model 8.
Pedersen was in a bad position trying to design mechanisms that had not yet been dreamed up by Browning. By coincidence, Browning worked for Remington for a time developing a handful of designs including the Model 8 and the Model 17 (later to be copied by Ithaca, Mossberg, and High Standard). Pedersen and Browning shared patents for the Model 17.
The quote from Browning about Pedersen appears in the writings of Julian Hatcher, a man who was good friends with both men.
RyeOnHam Apparently, Browning even put himself in that same "bad position" when he began designing the Hi-power. Having sold the 1911 patents to Colt, Browning had to essentially redesign the semi-auto for a second time. It seems to me, that the newer polymer guns have more in common with the Hi-power than with the 1911.
I'm sure Pedersen learned A LOT from the exposure to Browning's semi-auto concepts, and probably vice-versa. I happen to own two of Browning's semi-auto patented firearms: A MINT condition 1941 Remington model 11 (12) gauge. And, of course, a new manufacture S.A. 1911 A1. I do also own the ubiquitous 1894 Winchester rifle, but that's another era all together.
MASTER deBATER. There are stories floating around about the P35 and that Browning was working on the design the day he died. Well, that was in 1926. Dieudonné Saive took over the project at an early stage and had a more significant influence on the design than is often stated. Saive was a master in his own right but he walked in the shadow of Giants early in his career.
RyeOnHam Yea, I think you're right. If I'm not mistaken, it was Saive who designed the double stack magazine, that was later copied by EVERYONE. Often people credit Glock for the advancements in the auto-pistol world. But Saive's magazine might have been the most important breakthrough. Other than the striker fire trigger and the light weight materials, Glocks are not much of an advancement on the p-35.
Glock did absolutely nothing new... but he did that 'nothing new' in a most excellent manner. I cannot name a single innovation Glock can take credit for. It was his execution of the innovations of others, brought together in a tidy package that made him great. Yes, Saive designed the magazine prior to the pistol. It was given to "The Master", as FN employees referred to Browning, and Browning designed two pistols for it. The locked-breech design was the one that Saive completed. It would have been done sooner, but the military contracts kept changing their lists of requirements.
Thanks for comparing two guns I have, both of which I completely disassembled, cleaned/lubed, and put back together. All I had back then was the NRA manual. They were both a giant PIA.
I would really like to see complete frame disassembly of the 51. It's possible to assemble it with the disconnector in backwards. Won't work.
I have detail stripped the model 51 several times. I would not recommend it to anybody. Over the years, I just kind of do it. Don't need a guide to think about it. You get to know intuitively how a part comes out and how to get it back in. I will not be posting any complete disassembly videos unless something changes. I do plan to get a few more videos out, but my channel is demonetized. Hard to justify putting time and effort into it. Back to a hobby. For a while, I was making enough money on the channel that I could justify a video every two weeks or so. Now, I figured it's about three months per video, and that's if I work minimum wage and buy the gas and ammo myself. So, I'm only doing videos that appeal to me and what I am already doing.
If you think the Remington 51 is a bugger, try the Remington models 12 and 14. WOW!
@@RyeOnHam Back then, I had a practice of taking every new gun completely apart. I was quite intuitive mechanically. I took a Baby Browning, totally apart, and then realized they must have fixtures and special tools. I got it back together perfectly though. Once, I had to take apart 1 side of a box lock shotgun for some reason. Miracle I got that back together. I was quite an amateur gunsmith, I had very nice tools, files and stones etc. My hands are very weak now, I'm not sure about removing the slide from my 51, but I just got it, and I wanna clean and lube, especially the recoiling bolt. Thanks for your videos. If you don't do it, some butcher will. I have seen terrible things done to some guns.
Excellent, thank you...
Thank you for watching!
I recently purchased a Browning 1955 in .380. I bought it because it was in excellent condition and because it is a Browning.
I took it to the range & ran some Tula steel case ammo thru it.
It ran 100% - zero issues.
As you indicated, the sights are almost non existent, but point shooting it went fairly well.
It too tended to shoot low, but at 15 to 15 yards, all bullets were on the 8" x 10" target. Even managed to put 3 or 4 shots in the bullseye.
I am definitely a Remington fan and would love to find a Remington model 51. I'll agree that the Remington is probably a better pistol, but I've not found one yet.
Great review!
I meant 15 to 20 feet...
Not yards!
Thanks for sharing. These days we have excellent choices in .380's. 100 years ago, not so much.
Nice vid
Browning = Straight blowback. Remington = Delayed blowback.
Well, not entirely. The Remington 51 uses a 'hesitation' lock. Blowback for about 1/8 of an inch, then it operates like a locked breech SKS rifle. The slide moves while the bolt remains in place.