Remington 51 .380 - Page 2

Jim K · 05-21-2011, 08:10 PM

Just FWIW, another maker who used hard rubber grips that now could break is Savage, on their 1907, 1915 and 1917 pistols. Facing the same problem with the Browning patent, they used a moulded in lug that snaps into a slot cut in the frame. To remove the grips it is necessary to push each grip up from the magazine well and slide it to the rear. But those old grips can just snap when doing that. Fortunately, repros are also available, but the originals are still best on a collector gun.

With all the different ways of attaching grips, one thing should be said loud and clear: NEVER PRY GRIPS OFF A PISTOL until you make absolutely sure that is the way they were meant to be removed; in almost all cases, it was not.

Jim

Georgia Guy · 07-30-2011, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Hauff

Duckman/Swampelk -
ANY PICTURES??? I (and probably a lot of others) would like to see this one.

Not totally on topic but:

I bought it at a gun show almost 50 years ago. I think I paid $50.00.

What I have found in my research is that Remington would nickle plate on a special order / request basis only. They supposedly never offered it as an either blue finish or nickle plate choice when purchasing one.

Reportedly very few Model 51's ever came out of the factory this way I am led to understand. Handfull at best. I've not had any luck verifying this fact with Remington.

This one was manufactured in very late 1922 per the S/N.

Only found one other fellow, West Coast area, that has one and he claims he turned down an offer of $1,500 for his. His claim at least.

I rarely shoot mine anymore because I am scared to death something will break and then I would not be able to get the parts to fix it.

But if you have ever picked up, held and pointed a 51, it has the most natural feel you will ever experience. Never had that particular feeling with any other pistol I have ever owned.

Georgia Guy

Lanrezac · 09-19-2011, 03:58 AM

[QUOTE=The reason for all that elaborate grip system is that there was a patent on the idea of holding grips on an auto pistol with screws, and one John Browning had it. John Pedersen, the Remington designer (yep, he of the Pedersen device) had to figure out how to work around that.

Jim[/QUOTE]

As a newbie here, I hesitate to question the wisdom of the long-timers - but it strikes me as unlikely that Browning could have gotten a patent on retaining automatic pistol grips with screws. Pistol grips had been held on with screws ever since the time of the Colt Paterson, and automatic pistol grips had used them since at least the Mauser C96 - which predates Browning's work by a year or two.

Furthermore, both the H&R .32 and .25 Self Loaders, and the Warner Infallible .32 automatic, used grips held on with screws, and they were both on the market before the Remington 51, without any lawsuits from Browning.

I think the use of odd grip retaining systems in the Remington 51, the Savage 1908, and the S&W .35 were either efforts to invent a better mousetrap, or to simplify manufacture of the frame, by removing the need to have someplace to screw the grips to. (On second thought, the S&W and Remington systems may have complicated the frame machining - I will have to look at them again.)

The Europeans went in for this kind of thing too - the FN 1900 grips are attached to separate metal crosspiece that is not part of the frame, the Ortgies has some strange spring loaded arrangement, and even the Luger's grip retention system is a bit odd, apparently to simplify the frame.

Just my $.02.

RJay · 09-19-2011, 03:16 PM

The way the worlds patents laws used to work ( who knows, maybe they still do ) If you had a patent in the U S, then you could not patent the same thing in Europe. This is why Sam Colt patented his ideals in England first, then in the US. So it is conceivable that a early 20Th century patent that was registered only in the US could be still be used in Europe. Also remember, the patent was not for a through bolt. Some European countries protected their own workers and would automatically rule against a foreign Patent ( Spain for example ) Could be wrong, sure been wrong before

05-21-2011, 08:10 PM	#26
Jim K Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 6,408	Re: Remington 51 .380 Just FWIW, another maker who used hard rubber grips that now could break is Savage, on their 1907, 1915 and 1917 pistols. Facing the same problem with the Browning patent, they used a moulded in lug that snaps into a slot cut in the frame. To remove the grips it is necessary to push each grip up from the magazine well and slide it to the rear. But those old grips can just snap when doing that. Fortunately, repros are also available, but the originals are still best on a collector gun. With all the different ways of attaching grips, one thing should be said loud and clear: NEVER PRY GRIPS OFF A PISTOL until you make absolutely sure that is the way they were meant to be removed; in almost all cases, it was not. Jim

09-19-2011, 03:58 AM	#28
Lanrezac Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 685	Re: Remington 51 .380 [QUOTE=The reason for all that elaborate grip system is that there was a patent on the idea of holding grips on an auto pistol with screws, and one John Browning had it. John Pedersen, the Remington designer (yep, he of the Pedersen device) had to figure out how to work around that. Jim[/QUOTE] As a newbie here, I hesitate to question the wisdom of the long-timers - but it strikes me as unlikely that Browning could have gotten a patent on retaining automatic pistol grips with screws. Pistol grips had been held on with screws ever since the time of the Colt Paterson, and automatic pistol grips had used them since at least the Mauser C96 - which predates Browning's work by a year or two. Furthermore, both the H&R .32 and .25 Self Loaders, and the Warner Infallible .32 automatic, used grips held on with screws, and they were both on the market before the Remington 51, without any lawsuits from Browning. I think the use of odd grip retaining systems in the Remington 51, the Savage 1908, and the S&W .35 were either efforts to invent a better mousetrap, or to simplify manufacture of the frame, by removing the need to have someplace to screw the grips to. (On second thought, the S&W and Remington systems may have complicated the frame machining - I will have to look at them again.) The Europeans went in for this kind of thing too - the FN 1900 grips are attached to separate metal crosspiece that is not part of the frame, the Ortgies has some strange spring loaded arrangement, and even the Luger's grip retention system is a bit odd, apparently to simplify the frame. Just my $.02.

09-19-2011, 03:16 PM	#29
RJay Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arizona Posts: 3,484	Re: Remington 51 .380 The way the worlds patents laws used to work ( who knows, maybe they still do ) If you had a patent in the U S, then you could not patent the same thing in Europe. This is why Sam Colt patented his ideals in England first, then in the US. So it is conceivable that a early 20Th century patent that was registered only in the US could be still be used in Europe. Also remember, the patent was not for a through bolt. Some European countries protected their own workers and would automatically rule against a foreign Patent ( Spain for example ) Could be wrong, sure been wrong before __________________ RonJames