The Remington RP9 is NOT a Piece of SHIT – Full Review & Rebuttal

Buy a Remington RP9 on GunsAmerica!

The internet is probably the hardest place in the world to admit that you did something wrong. The Mom’s basement trolls are brutal, and half the time, they won’t even accept that you were really wrong. Everything has to be some kind of payoff, and if it wasn’t so pathetic it would actually be funny. I was a pioneer of internet automation, creating what would be the first ever version of free remote authoring software like you are reading from now, and I don’t think any of us could have envisioned the way it would empower the useless with what they perceive as the power to share their ignorant and useless perspective.

In this particular case, the Remington RP9, Clay Martin’s review wasn’t technically “wrong.” He said that the gun’s slide was much thicker than the gun he expected when he opened the box. It is actually several millimeters thicker than a Glock 45 slide, as you can see in the video. Clay said that the gun is ugly. Yeah, it’s pretty ugly. He also compared side by side the 18 round Remington magazine to 17 round Smith and Glock mags. It was longer. And most of his other criticisms were entirely valid, as compared to the guns in his video, the Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0, and his service Glock. Clay has had to rely on firearms in many life and death situations, and from that perspective, the RP9 does look like a Chinese knockoff Transformer that your alcoholic father bought the night before Christmas.

As I explained in the video, we got this piece in right before we were leaving for SHOT Show (some of us fly early to set up the GA Dealer Services booth). I thought it was funny. It seemed like Clay’s criticisms were unassailable, and personally for me, since Cerberus purchased Remington, especially after the R51 debacle, I figured that the “empty suits” at Remington wouldn’t even notice it. (more on that subject later in the week if I have time to get it together). There was no real reason to not run it, or to give Remington a chance to answer the criticisms before running the story.

The day after it went into the website, before the GunsAmerica Digest went out to 850,000 people on Monday, the PR lady for Remington got a message through to me, asking if we could kill the story, and come visit the factory before running it. To me it was surprising that we made the radar, and I figured it was just damage control on a crappy gun. We really had no other big stories to start out SHOT Show in the can, so we ran it.

Fast forward to now, and I can tell you that the folks at Remington have not disagreed with the fact that the Remington RP9 does not hold a candle to a Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0, or a Glock. Both are professional level firearms, and both have pricetags over $500 street price, generally closer to $600. The Remington RP9 was not meant to compete with these guns, and it currently has a street price under $400.

For Clay that is no excuse. He is a professional gunfighter, or at least he was for a long time. Equipment that is not on par for a professional is a complete waste of time for Clay. If you can’t afford an M&P or a Glock, use your fucking bare knuckles pussy.

For me, not so much. I’ve never been in a gunfight. And though I carry a gun every day and have since I was 18 years old, I don’t intend to seek out a gunfight ever. I love cheap guns that work, because it gives people who have nobody to stand up for them the power to stand up for themselves. G-d created man, but it wasn’t Sam Colt that made them equal as we all have repeated for almost 200 years. In today’s world, it was Kel-Tec that made them equal.

I’m also a fan of Remington, or at least I was before they were bought. Over the years I’ve been a cheerleader for Ruger, Colt, Smith & Wesson, and even Browning and Winchester (which are really both just marketing names on guns made wherever these days, and owned by FN), because I just love guns. I love the history. I love the gadgetry. I love old stories. I love new stories. The pillars of American firearms mean a ton to me.

So it was a huge hit for me when Remington released the R51 and it turned out to be a dog. Then they bought the Rorbaugh, which I knew was a piece of junk (and which I later learned that they had to completely re-engineer because I was correct). I have an original Remington Rolling block, and I used ’58 Remington revolvers for SASS cowboy shooting for many years. It was hard for me to accept that perhaps Cerberus had bought the most recognized name in American firearms to destroy it.

For Clay, not so much. He has owned very few guns made of steel and wood, and if you gave him a ’58 Remington, he’d probably ask you how the shells go in it (it is a cap & ball pistol). But unlike most of the ex-military guys who have invaded online gun reviews, Clay was actually an avid shooter before he went in the military, and he also has some engineering bonafides, so he can appreciate what it takes to make guns work properly. Clay is a really smart dude who loves guns, but he doesn’t have a connection to the history of guns.

That’s a long explanation that translated means that if a gun is a piece of shit, Clay doesn’t care who made it or what it costs, and he isn’t going to stamp his name on it and tell you to buy it. He would never buy it. End of story. No highway option. From that perspective, Clay’s review is valid and there is nothing wrong with it. Well, mostly nothing.

The only thing that I was shaking my head at when it came to Clay’s review was the comparison of the magazines and the grip. Why would you compare magazines side by side, and the gun without the magazine side by side, but not the gun with the mag side by side? If you watch my video, the length is exactly the same on all the guns (I don’t have an M&P – but I wish I did!). I also didn’t get the grip is too small feeling on the gun. I have fat hands with short fingers, and it fits me a heck of a lot better than a Glock. I can’t shoot more than 10 rounds through a Glock without my hands shaking, which is why I have been an adherent to the Springfield XD guns for over a decade. I hate Glocks. I shot the Remington pretty ok. Note that I mistakenly compared capacities of a 9, 40 and 45 in a massive brain fart. The Remington has one extra round over other guns of the same size.

The rest of Clay’s criticisms are also mostly a matter of preference. The slide is larger than a 45 Glock slide, so the the fact that they just wanted to make a .45 out of it doesn’t even make sense. It’s over-engineered. It’s too damn thick, for a 9, for a 45, maybe for a 50BMG. But if you read the Lee reloading manual, they’ll tell you that the RCBS Rockchucker is over-engineered and too damn thick. In the case of the press, it’s considered a plus. In the case of the gun, somehow it turns into a fatal negative in Clay’s estimation. To me, big deal. If you don’t like it don’t buy it.

I’m not going to chase down every detail from Clay’s video, but I addressed the core point in my video. This gun was created to compete with the Ruger American Pistol. Right now they are on GunsAmerica for almost exactly the same price as the RP9, and Ruger is selling a bucketload of them. After meeting with some of those “empty suits” in the development team at Remington, I can tell you that they see Remington as a Ruger’esque workingman’s brand, and they feel that they have some game to compete. At the lower end of the spectrum, the most important thing is that the gun runs, and that it doesn’t break down over time. That is why it was crushing to them to see bad reviews when they knew that the gun ran well, Clay’s criticisms aside.

And indeed, Clay’s gun did run well. He just didn’t show that on camera. In his defense, this was the 3rd gun we sent him to review before SHOT that he absolutely despised, and by then he had pretty much had enough.

The Military Arms Channel Videos

In my video I went over some of the details of another internet reviewer who trashed the RP9, the Military Arms Channel on Youtube. And I really only took that on because Remington said that he refused to send them the gun and the ammo he used to check out, even though they contacted him immediately after his review got some attention and sent him a new gun. He had actually purchased an RP9 at a gunshop, and in the video there is a repeated behavior where the gun jams, and the next round gets caught on the bottom of the feed ramp.

These are the details that leads me to believe that the review was unfair:

1. The first gun fails with 124 grain reloads repeatedly. You can call reloads “remanufactured” all you want, but they are still reloads, and they were probably reloaded on a standard Dillon 1050 with a GSI bullet feeder, both products I covered for SHOT this year. Anyone who has reloaded knows that it is very easy for things to get a few thousandths out of whack and the bullets don’t look any different, but they don’t even chamber. He could have held the review to try other ammo, even if every single round failed, and they didn’t.

2. He then runs 119 grain ZQI that he happened to have in the truck, and it works flawlessly. But he attributes this to “hollow points” and claims that “ball ammo” doesn’t work. Then he manages to get it to repeat the same jam with one magazine of ZQI 123 grain (I thought it was 124 in the video). Then after he says he’s done shooting, he goes and shoots the RP9 again, and it runs the original reloads perfectly. Yet there is a printed panel in the video saying that the gun was unpredictable. This was made after his tests. Could it be that some of that case of reloads was not the correct length?

3. At no point do we seem him tap the mags, or take the mag out to try to figure it out. Any normal guy at the range would be taking apart the mags to see if there were burs in there, but he does not even tap them, which should be standard practice.

4. The second gun does not fail at all. But rather than use some of the ammo Remington sent him to re-test the first gun, he burns it all to “make sure” he was getting it right in the second gun.

5. At that point, for a second video with no deadline, wouldn’t you go out and buy some ammo at Walmart to try to get both guns to fail on camera? If only for the buzz it’ll make after Remington personally sent him a gun?

That last point I alluded to in the video, but in the Youtube comments when I put up my video, before writing this article, nobody seemed to get that, so I will spell it out.

The MAC video is a hit piece, plain and simple, from someone who has an anti-capitalist attitude about what they perceive is a behemoth company putting out shitty products just to make more money that they already have too much of and way more than him. The innocence is false. He is a just another Youtuber who knows very little about guns trying to make a living from the eyeballs of the un and underemployed masses who have time to sit and watch Youtube all day. In person, the guys from our crew who have met him say he’s a nice guy, but in this case he was not fair to Remington, and he could have done a much better job.

As for me, I don’t think the Remington RP9 holds a candle to the Ruger American Pistol in looks, feel and ergonomics, but it does run, and it runs all weighs and types of ammo, as you can see in my video. At a street price under $400, I don’t think the RP9 will break any records, but it certainly is not a piece of shit either.

I am actually going to leave the comments on for this article, just to bath in the profundity of Prosac on Monday. Let’s see how clueless and ignorant they get. Oh and wait till you see what I’ve got coming for Friday.

{ 148 comments… add one }
  • Me November 5, 2017, 10:15 pm

    I think we all know where the RP9 stands on the spectrum of; yes I want one to I wouldn’t even shoot one if it was given to me (HiPoint.) But this review/review of a review WAS TERRIBLE. It’s hard to listen to someone that says another review was garbage but goes on to say how that same reviews points are valid. Shave the beard, change your name, and hopefully you’ll be able to start a new reviewing something else you know very little about. TTFN

  • Dan August 5, 2017, 9:00 am

    Omg, another pathetic artiicle/review from Guns Amaerica. You don’t need to be a professional gunfighter to desire a professional-quality firearm. If you can’t afford a Glock or an M&P 2.0, save a little longer or buy a used one. Remington pistols are somewhere between terrible and disappointing, and this author just dances around that. I’m happily moving on from Guns America – this is consistently the worst fireams-related journalism out there.

  • Tyler March 25, 2017, 9:21 pm

    Remington burned me on a Viper 22 that shot exactly 3 rounds and would never fire another. Not to mention their 22 ammo is consistently junk. Clays review seemed about right on target for this company… To me.

  • Dale Robertson March 25, 2017, 2:52 pm

    PAUL HELINSKI I am amazed that you can just wipe out 200 years of history with the single swipe of a pen. There is a reason that we have said for almost 200 years that Sam Colt made men equal. That reason is, that he started producing affordable repeating firearms for the average man, almost 200 years ago. I really don’t know how you chose a small company like KEL-TEK to elevate to honor of being the ones who make all men equal even in this day and age. If we are talking about modern times then it is much more plausible to say that around the world, the arm most synonymous with making the most men equal is the Kalashnikov. They are cheep and abundantly available and even a 12 year old kid in Africa can pick one up and rule the world in which he lives. KEL-TEK doesn’t even come close. I just don’t know how you can DISRESPECT Samuel Colt when in 1848 the Texas Rangers were going up against overwhelming odds and winning because of the Colt Walker Revolvers they carried and most of our American fighting men and women today are still armed with a Colt Rifle. You are the first person I have ever heard say that KEL-TEC had anything to do with making anyone equal. For me the rest of your article went downhill after this ridiculous statement. How could you throw away everything Colt did during the Civil War, the Gold Rush, the Indian Wars, World War I & II, Korea, Vietnam, and so much more? I just don’t get it. Why KEL-TEK? They didn’t even open their doors until 1991. I doubt that they have made even 1% of the guns Colt has made. I doubt they have made even 1% of the Colt guns which are still in active service. Why KEL-TEK?

    • Paul Helinski March 26, 2017, 1:12 am

      Because not everyone is in your bubble Dale.

    • John December 26, 2017, 12:59 am

      Sorry Dale and you other Kel-Tec snobs. I have owned a P-11, a P32, Sub 2000, and for the last 5 years or more carried my P3AT most days, have shot hundreds of rounds through it, ZERO malfunctions ! You people remind me of the “if it ain’t Harley, it ain’t NUTHIN'” or “if it ain’t Ford, it ain’t NUTHIN'” mindset. You are very willing to put a product down, without ever once actually USING it. Sad little trolls. Enjoy your lonely little lives.

    • Jim December 26, 2017, 9:23 pm

      Funny, when I started carrying a Glock back in 1985 people made the same sort of silly comments. As for throwing the rifle that our Military carries into the mix, sorry it is not a “Colt”. It is an Armalite whether in AR-15, AR-10 or M-16. He is correct about AK’s but really how many people walk around with one in their pocket. AND Remington really is attempting to make some handguns that are the very reason I started carrying that first Glock. Ones that always work!!! What the hell else can you ask from a handgun. I happen to own everything from a custom Gold Cup to small pocket pistols. And I can tell you that the ONLY thing that matters is the absolute confidence that the pistol is going to work every time it gets pulled out and the trigger is pulled. And that cheap little Remington 380 that always works and that big heavy RP-9 if it works every time and I have it on me is a hell of a lot better that my expensive custom Gold Cup sitting in my safe at home. Since I have fired somewhere between 400,000 and 500,000 rounds through Glock 17’s that is my choice in weapons, and when I am going where a life and death situation MIGHT occur that is what I damn sure make sure is somewhere about my body, but as a matter of fact I MOST often am carrying a cheap 380 in a pocket. Why because it is real light and it shot 100 rounds without a failure, and so I believe it will fire the next six as well. Light weight, VERY cheap Saturday night specials really were what made men equal. What made people equal was a 12 gauge double barreled shotgun in the hands of a scared woman protecting her children. Ask any belligerent male who ever looked down the barrels of one. 🙂 Not a good carry gun in my shorts and T-shirt either…but sure as hell beats a colt every time. And by the way when colt was ruling the roost it was because they were cheap and light. Remingtons at that time really were better… 🙂

  • wasntme March 25, 2017, 9:08 am

    Good point about the ammo but, I don’t want to read a test of a gun provided by the manufacturer. I want one done on a gun bought at a gun store, just like the one I might get.

    But overall read this like someone got butt hurt and someone is trying to patch things up. If you can’t stand behind what you publish, done publish it.

  • Just a reader March 22, 2017, 11:30 am

    I never comment on sites like this. I read both of the product evaluations, and take them for what they are, just the opinions of the writers. Now that doesn’t mean that they are not value based, but in the end, how pretty, how thick, how heavy are all just opinions. What is for one, isn’t for another. And I accept that. But the facts are the facts. Now, what I will say, is that there is no excuse for a gun that doesn’t work. A gun only does one thing. Go BANG when you press the trigger. Now it may not be accurate and all that, but a gun has only one function. Press Trigger….Go BANG! Period. And if it doesn’t do that and do it reliably, there is no excuse for it. And if a gun can only run one type of ammo, then the company should say that at the outset. Would most of us buy a gun that only fed Brand X ammo? Probably not, and probably not at any price point. PRICE POINT IS NO EXCUSE FOR UNRELIABILITY, PERIOD! So no excuses for this gun not running reloads or the such. And talking about this or that excuse when other guns will feed anything short of rocks, really just speaks to design flaws that need to be corrected and should have been before being released. Sorry, but if a gun doesn’t do what a gun is supposed to do, (Back to the “Press Trigger..Go Bang”), then it’s just a paper weight! A historical curiosity. So let’s not give a pass to any company, large or small, or based on past successes or failures, and call it as it is. I’m just tired of old tired excuses. I personally don’t want to own a gun that is finicky. And if it is, then I want to know upfront. This one wouldn’t be one for me, based on nothing else but the excuses that were made for it in this article. I felt that this rebuttal article was just a poor attempt to soften the blow that Clay dealt to Remington in the original article. Sorry Paul.

    • Paul Helinski March 24, 2017, 2:48 pm

      But my gun was not finicky at all. His second gun also was not finicky. There are also tens of thousands of them out in the market with no complaints and no returns.

    • Jim December 26, 2017, 9:40 pm

      This same reasoning was why I would never carry even a 1911 into a gun fight situation if I had an alternative such as a Glock. Why? Because the first 15 or 20 of them that I shot a lot always had a hiccup somewhere along the line. Even that expensive custom one that shoots like a rifle. Even it has had the occasional hiccup. BUT no Glock I have ever owned EVER had even one with factory ammunition. And at least two of those I shot more than 10,000 rounds out of without cleaning them. The one exception was when a friend gave me a couple of hundred rounds of “re-manufactured” ammo that he bought from a gun store. Every round was seated too shallow. That same Glock had never hiccuped with many thousands of rounds of my own “re-manufactored” ammo. What would I have done if I read that review back in 1985 when I bought a Glock that first time? Instead of reading where it shot 5000 times without a miss. Probably not bought one! Which would have been a terrible mistake.

  • Clifford March 21, 2017, 4:26 pm

    Personally, I couldn’t agree more with your statements, and as a side note* Clay may be well respected in his community, however; to the average Joe out there, I don’t think he’s a good representative nor ambassador to Guns America, I’m a big advocate of this site and have been for a long time, you guys bring an honest review and some value to the consumer. I haven’t seen one review this year from Clay that told me anything of value and regarding Shot show, well that’s the worst I’ve seen, Representing Guns America there’s a need for questions like pricing, availability information that would be considered informative to the general public

    • Paul Helinski March 21, 2017, 7:03 pm

      I enjoyed Clay’s SHOT stuff. I think this year was the best we ever did actually. Thanks for the kind words.

    • Jim Wing March 22, 2017, 3:00 pm

      Clifford you don’t know what your talking about..I LOVE Clay because he says it like it is, not what some “gun manufacturer” is paying them to say, or giving them “free shit” in return for a good review..(ie: ever read a BAD review of a Wilson Combat ??) I’ll take the word of a “combat Vet ” all day over these arm chair Rambos.. As far a Shot17, he asked EVERY review he did about things like MSRP & availability stupid ass, learn to read..

    • Charles Murphey March 23, 2017, 4:14 pm

      Clay Martin is what led me to Guns America. Remember it takes all kinds

  • Dusty March 21, 2017, 12:58 pm

    Well, it must all be true if it’s on the internet?… Speaking of ‘dogs’? Anyone recall the Colt 2000?
    And QC? I have owned two Gold Cups that would not run two magazines in a row without at least one stoppage- for about a 7-14% malfunction rate… And the Remington’s 1911- I have fired one extensively, with factory ball ammo and reloads and it is still 100% after thousands of rounds, with quality control certainly as good as many pistols being sold across counters in a lot of places. All of which means very little, as samples of one (or none in the case of anecdotal hearsay) don’t mean a great deal in statistics world.
    Then there is that elusive term ‘gunfighting’. I might suggest that pistols are what you use to fight your way to your rifle or shotgun, for that sort of thing. And too, isn’t the number one requirement in any gun fight having a gun?

    • Paul Helinski March 21, 2017, 7:06 pm

      You thought you were going to buy a new series 80 gold cup and that it would work lol? Now that’s funny. I’ve not ever seen one that ran out of the box. I actually wanted one of those Colt 2000s but never got one.

    • Paul Helinski March 21, 2017, 7:06 pm

      You thought you were going to buy a new series 80 gold cup and that it would work lol? Now that’s funny. I’ve not ever seen one that ran out of the box. I actually wanted one of those Colt 2000s but never got one.

  • Alfred Friend March 21, 2017, 9:25 am

    People, get over it. If you don’t like the gun, DON’T BUY IT! If you think you could do better, get some money together and build a better mousetrap. With over 200 handguns in my collection, I have a variety of what some would call losers or snoozers, but they each have their place in my safes. Each are not good or bad but have differences that make them what they are. Thank God this is America and there is such a variety of guns and you can buy them legally, if you’re qualified.

    America, what a country…………………….

  • Rob March 20, 2017, 10:24 pm

    The bad reviews (and there are many) are a fair assessment of the gun. The problem with Remington is that they’ve had so many dogs in the last few years, the quality control on their 1911’s is poor at best compared to similar priced ones (i.e. Springfield), the R-51 version 1 and 2 was a total disaster, and the RP-9 is just a terrible gun (I’m being kind calling it terrible), but to claim that we’ll you’re not buying a $600 gun you are buying $400 gun is NO excuse for an unreliable gun. If you’re looking for a budget gun you’d be better served buying Hi-Point for $150, you would be hard pressed to kill it and it goes bang reliably when you pull the trigger.

    Remington needs to realize that by today’s standards their guns don’t compare to Ruger, Springfield, Glock, S&W or any other quality manufacturer, they are more inline with Jimenez Arms, Hi-Point, and, maybe Kel-Tec.

  • Barkus Rudis March 20, 2017, 8:42 pm

    Ok, maybe it is not as bad as first thought. But, Remington could have done a lot better, like challenge Sig for our U.S. Army switch from the Beretta. Instead, we are discussing this. Shameful, especially since arms dealers are having a downturn in business, another foreign company embarrasses our own domestic arms manufacturers. This never should have happened. Its going to take the Trumpster to pull back the contract. But what then?

  • Smitty March 20, 2017, 6:19 pm

    Sorry Dude,
    You picked the wrong guy to mess with when you picked on MAC’s review of the gun. He did get another gun from Remington and adjusted his review….some. MAC is far more professional and fair in his reviews and he will tell you he is not a professional gun guy. As far as Clay is concerned. He is one of your guys and if you want to gig him that’s your business. I like Clay and being a former SEABEE I was trained by Marines and have a great deal of respect for them. (I think I just threw up in my mouth) I am not offended by his potty mouth, after all we sailors do our best in trying to out foul mouth our retarded little brother marines. You just can’t put lipstick on a pig and call it something else. Let this dog lie where it is.

  • Ratster March 20, 2017, 3:42 pm

    I own 12 pistols and would never buy any plastic junk. This RP9 is the ultimate plastic junk. I have a Bulgarian Makarov that has never failed with any type of ammo to the tune of 2000 rds Why can’t American companies make a pistol like that.

  • Bob W March 20, 2017, 2:49 pm

    Put aside the looks, brand, ergonomics, and price. Why would you own a weapon when there is a plausible chance that it will jam? Pass!

  • Scott McDaniel March 20, 2017, 2:42 pm

    Paul, methinks you make this way too personal. Reviews are one person’s opinion, and I have a take on those – they’re like sphincters in that everyone has one, and all of them stink but mine. So you don’t like Clay’s methodology – make your own review using what you perceive to be the proper methodology. But your consistent attacks on Clay, whether accurate or not, convince the reader that this is a vendetta article. My personal opinion of Remington (and I’m a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist, so don’t try to play THAT card on me) is that they are a pretty stinky corporation. I’ve made the mistake of buying one of their firearms in the past and regretted it mightily, dumping it as quickly as I could find a chump … errrr, make that a willing buyer. Their ammo burns about as dirty as any I’ve seen, and I’ve had an inordinate number of FTFs with it, which explains why, in the thousands and thousands of rounds I own, you won’t find one round with the Remington stamp on it. I judge a company based on one thing – performance – and when their products have left me wanting time and again, I ain’t a fan boy. Perhaps Clay has had similar experiences with Remington and his opinions were tainted going on – who knows, for none of us are mind readers. But the best way for you to refute Clay’s assertions is not to call him an a-hole (figuratively) over and over but to present cold hard facts and let them speak for themselves. For the reader gets the feeling that Clay wasn’t the only one whose opinions were tainted by prior experiences. Et tu, Paul?

  • Robert March 20, 2017, 2:35 pm

    At this point, Remington is facing an uphill battle in regaining consumer confidence, and they are already a bit behind the curve. Regardless what you may think about where in the market it’s meant to compete, I just don’t see this budget-priced boat anchor doing it for them.

  • KMacK March 20, 2017, 2:10 pm

    So… The VP9 is a low price gun that is unreliable when using reloads. BFD. So is my 1911 (oddly, another Remington product from another century). The slide is “wider than a Glock slide”? This obviously is a “so what” situation. Wider, thicker slide = heavier slide = somewhat lighter recoil spring. For those of us who have old hands, less squeeze and pull to rack the slide is a good thing. The magazine doesn’t feed right? Tap-rack-bang is what I was taught in another century, but it works in modern guns too.
    And the “ugly” bit… This is a weapon, not an artwork. If it works dependably (as you demonstrate) when fed with new ammunition, what’s the problem? You’re gonna shoot it, not marry it.
    While I am less than happy with yet another striker-fired pistol on the market, I don’t see anything wrong with this product at the price point in which it’s being offered. It is accurate enough to work at real world distances and it’s a 9mm, not a .380! Most .380 pistols cost more than this and are less powerful, so what’s the problem? This pistol has a decent barrel length, unlike the more expensive .380’s it’s priced to compete with (which I suspect was Remington’s aim).
    This is a 9mm pistol with a decent barrel at a .380 price. When fed decent ammo, it works. It’s accurate enough to be decent protection at real world distances. It’s fairly light and has a decent sized magazine The ammunition is affordable, unlike .380 ammunition. It’s ugly, which means it’s noticeable (if you have to present, having a noticeable weapon is a plus). No problems noted here, sorry.

  • FirstStateMark March 20, 2017, 12:30 pm

    I’ve seen reviews on YouTube by gunners who review firearms and this POS jammed on all kinds of factory ammo. Sorry Remington! Your R51 is a POS and so is this. Stay out of the handgun business.

    • Carl March 20, 2017, 1:57 pm

      Each is entitled to their own opinion, but as “Dirty Harry” said “opinions are like assholes, everybody has one”. You criticize both Remington’s with the premis of watching a video. If you can make an unbiased opinion based upon that, you are better than I “Gunga Din”. I must disagree with you on the R51. Yes I read the technical data, watched film, and conversed with Remington about the first generation and waited for the 2nd gen to come out. I was skeptical about the purchase, however, I did purchased one with the proviso that if I didn’t like it I could return it. Sure there are a few things that could be better, but it’s accurate, is reasnoably comfortable in my bear paw hands and has a very natural point with outstanding sight alignment for me, easy to conceal/carry, and goes bang each time I press the trigger. Breakin had a few hiccups but overall it has performed very well and I find that the more I shoot it the better it operates. So the moral is unless you have first hand experience with something don’t form an opinion before you go off half cocked. Thanks and keep ’em center mass!

      • Mark Davis March 20, 2017, 11:34 pm

        Modern production pistols DO NOT need a “break in.” My glock out of the box = reliable, cz plastic out of the box = reliable, Sig plastic out of the box = reliable, Ruger plastic out of the box = reliable. Do you see the trend here. Remington is getting it wrong. Pretty easy stuff.

        • Paul Helinski March 21, 2017, 9:13 am

          Well if you watch the video, it doesn’t fail in about a thousand rounds, right out of the box.

  • Hoodoo March 20, 2017, 12:25 pm

    Me, I am sensitive to size. All I want is a reliable .45 ACP pistol no larger than the dimensions of a Colt 1905 automatic. Is that too much to ask? The 1911 is the most overbuilt pistol of all time.

    • Carl March 20, 2017, 1:59 pm

      Check out Cylinder & Slide in Fremont, Nebraska. Bill Laughridge builds a beautiful and I do mean BEAUTIFUL version of the ’05.

  • TJ Reeder March 20, 2017, 11:51 am

    WOW! the first voice in my head says “Damn! What a shit storm”! The second voice says “Fuckin A”! Sorry but I had to do that. My grandpa told my dad that profanity was an ignorant mans way of extending his vocabulary, I asked dad what he said
    ” He said WOW No Shit”? He got slapped by granma.
    All joking aside, So what if Clay talks like a Marine, it is what it is, pass it by if you’re offended. I prefer to hear a man speak his mind in whatever manner than one who wouldn’t say shit if he had a mouth full. I too am a former Marine and in boot camp I was issued an M-1 then they issued the fuck word and it’s been with me all my life. Does it show little or no class to use it? I don’t know but I know a lot of ladies use the word as well, it says a lot when applied properly.
    Fine, on to the gun issue. I like Clay’s reviews because they are entertaining and have little bullshit in them, Paul, I’m sorry but your reviews just seem to mumble along, but I know that I couldn’t do what you and Clay do and I envy both of you for your ability to do it.
    I’ve been a 1911 fan all my life and that was pretty much my TO weapon for the time I was in the Corps and I’ve carried one for many long years, I’ve owned XD’s and Glocks and damn near every other type made and then one day I picked up a CZ 75 and it was lust from that moment, I have three now, two from the CZ Custom shop ( BIG shout out to Stuart Wong!) I now have a safe full of queens that I don’t shoot anymore. CZ is the best kept secret in the gun world. I have big hands and even my little CZ 82 truck gun fits my cookie crushers.
    Fords- Chevy’s, Apples-Oranges, Glocks-S&W’s, Boxers-Jockey’s, we all have our likes.
    Clay, keep on doing what you do and the same for you Paul. But I must admit that for one GA reviewer to go out of his way to attempt to slap down another GA reviewer sounds like a put up job. Just saying.

  • Will Ganz March 20, 2017, 11:43 am

    OK. I’ll have an open mind about it. Get one and run a case of yellow box UMC 9mm FMJ through it. Then run a case each of Wolf and then Barnaul Brown Bear for good measure. I’d love to see this story refuted with some hard core shooting.

    Right now, a competitor, DiamondBack DB9fs, will not run with +P ammo since it was not designed for it. Given that as an economical large 9mm, it isn’t a logic stretch to say another economical large 9mm(eg RP1) won’t run with anything other than the cheap 115 grain ammo. And given the R51 first release fiasco, the adage of ‘Once bitten, twice shy” becomes easier to understand.

  • John March 20, 2017, 11:39 am

    I hate to be a Troll, but you spend way too much time telling us why other people are wrong, way too little time telling us why this gun works. If I had a nickel for every time you mentioned Clay, I’d be rich.

    Everybody knows that the guns sent to “reviewers” are hand-tuned by the factory, NOT in any way like the gun we will purchase retail. Everybody also knows that “reviewers” do things differently. Comparing any two reviews is like comparing apples to oranges. Like any mechanical device, guns have a “break-in” period. Manufacturers do a poor job of conveying this to consumers. Until a gun is properly broken-in, any and all reviews aren’t worth the paper they are written on.

    What is a proper “break-in? Wish I knew! Ask a thousand people, and you’ll get a thousand different answers.

    What I would like to see from reviewers is consistent test parameters, coupled with a emotionless report on what worked, and what didn’t.

    • Paul Helinski March 20, 2017, 12:33 pm

      That is not at all true of most manufacturers these days, including Remington, but also Ruger, Springfield, Savage, CZ, Glock, S&W, Sig, and surprisingly Colt. The only manufacturer I know of that requires a break in these days is Kahr. And I’ve heard that SCCY suggests it, but have never read it myself. I don’t think “everybody” knows it. I think anticapitalist morons “know” it.

  • Louis Angel Lopez March 20, 2017, 11:39 am

    So the gun is terrible and you guys are defending remington who is one of the worst conglomerations ever. And then you want us to believe you aren’t bought when clearly there are reputable sources SHOWING otherwise when you only write a little article. Yeah, I’ll just do my self a favor and show my self out of here. Thank you.

  • Blazed March 20, 2017, 11:37 am

    I am confused, I had no idea that 115 gr ammo was the 9mm standard. I had no idea that my 9mm reloads are a huge problem. I am so messed up I think I’ll sell my guns and my reloading equipment. What’s really weird is how my Sigs, FN’s and Glock’s
    all shoot 115 grain and everything else. Even the light load 147 grain for low muzzle flip shooting. 😉

    • Fred March 20, 2017, 2:26 pm

      Thank you, Blazed! I have been shooting the 115 grain 9mm for a long time, factory loads and reloads( If you can’t set your dies properly, go to a class and learn to do it right!), without any problems in any of the multitude of 9mm handguns I have owned. If you are selling at a discount, I will buy your worthless 9mm handguns and your reloading equipment… after all they won’t ever work properly again. I love sarcasm.

    • Gopher Baroque March 20, 2017, 8:15 pm

      9mm 147 grain was developed for a suppressed SMG. The 9mm pistol was meant to be a light bullet going as fast as it can be propelled out of a relatively short barrel. 147 grain just makes it heavy and slow, with reduced stopping power.

      • Paul Helinski March 20, 2017, 10:56 pm

        They were created for subsonic use with suppressors, but don’t tell the peanut gallery that.

  • Dan March 20, 2017, 11:19 am

    This is all moot. Whether or not the pistol is a “piece of crap”, it is huge and ugly. It’ll be out of production and all but forgotten two years from now.

  • John D'Orazio March 20, 2017, 11:14 am

    Building a product “to a price point” does not excuse insufficient engineering, poor design or lack of reliability. I own a first generation Canik TP9, paying $317.00 all in for it. It has functioned with everything I have fed it and been accurate in the process. Well over 1000 rounds without any issues. OK, the RP9 might be clunky, I can overlook that. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But, I found MAC’s review and Clay’s to be objective and fair. The failures of the RP9 are evident in these as well as other reviews and Remington should accept the criticism, correct the problems and go back to marketing the gun.

  • Glenn March 20, 2017, 10:54 am

    Way to apologize and advocate for an industry giant after they pull your chain.
    Looks like you should have a promising career in print for all the gun rags that are so very credible.
    Had you simply done a second review giving “your” opinions of the pistol sans commentary on Clay’s review it would be less obvious, but your point by point refutation or excusing of flaws and shortcomings Clay expounded on make it seem as if you’re running down a list of points the Remington
    PR department wanted you to address in their favor. Your article comes across as a review done by someone who’s hotel stay and bar tab are being picked up by the company rep of the manufacturer, whether that is the case or not.
    It’s a sub-par product, and if Big Green didn’t want it panned in a review they should have done a better job designing and manufacturing it. PR is no substitute for R&D.

  • Charlie March 20, 2017, 10:37 am

    To me it is a “Leaverite handgun. Leave it right where you see it! If you like it buy it. If not Don’t. Simple. The video does nothing to change my opinion or desire to go out and sell my HK to get one.

  • JW March 20, 2017, 10:36 am

    You must have missed the follow-up MAC video where he ran the same lot of NEWLY manufactured Freedom Munitions 124gr through nine other guns without a single hiccup…
    As for out-of-spec ammo, if it fits in the mag it should function. It obviously fit into the magazine, so I don\’t know what your argument actually is. Any real hand loader knows the pain of this for autos, especially rifles.You also didn\’t mention the issue MAC had with the ambidextrous slide release? Why promote ambi if controls if they won\’t work properly?Others have mentioned the lack of respect for the big gun rags because their favorable reviews are bought and paid for by the manufacturers. While entertaining to some extent, brutally honest they are not. Following this \”review\”, GA now resides in the camp of the gun rags…If I want real-world info, I\’ll head for YouTube.

    • John Bibb March 20, 2017, 1:03 pm

      HI JW–case length and thickness is critical on the almost straight sided cases used in semi-auto pistols and rifles. The go and no go head space gauges are only a few thousandths of an inch different. Apparently the amount of crimping needed to keep a bullet properly seated in the case during heavy recoil is another problem area. Just “obviously fit into the magazine” is a good start. However, it isn’t good enough! I’ve had a lot of problems with the almost straight sided .30 cal M-1 Carbine cases in commercial ammo. Factory S&B, Remington, Hornady ammo works perfectly. Factory AQ bulk ammo has cases that are a few thousandths of an inch thicker–and cause jams every few shots due to brass / copper “rings” building up at the chamber “step” the cartridges seat on. Too tight a head space because the “ring” is preventing the bolt from properly rotating closed.! A few thousands of an inch really do make a big difference! The good ammo almost never fails to work properly in my 5 year old Auto Ordnance Cone carbine.
      John Bibb

      • JW March 20, 2017, 4:17 pm

        Hi John B! Remember, this is NEW manufactured ammo, which MAC shows the same lot number running in nine other firearms without an issue and completely unedited. I would encourage you to go watch the original RP9 MAC video on YouTube, the malfunction was before the cartridge even entered the chamber, but rather it was getting jammed into the edge of the feed ramp. This could suggest an overall length issue, but again, if it fits in the mag it should function. I\’d like to add that Freedom Munitions isn\’t a guy loading ammo in his garden shed three budweisers in. The newly manufactured FM stuff is better in my experience than any UMC, WWB or other US factory budget ammunition. Not that they couldn\’t have an issue, but that it\’s been documented that the exact lot operates other firearms of various age/manufacture just fine.

        • John Bibb March 20, 2017, 8:26 pm

          HI JW–hand loading is a skilled art! I bought my AQ .30 M-1 Carbine ammo from CTD. No reloading for me. At the time the AO Clone had a number of other problems–a sticky action! Didn’t matter which ammo I used. I bought the head space gauges–it was good. I bought the bolt disassembly tool and smoothed out the extractor–sharp corners and tool marks. I used fine steel wool to remove excess Parkerizing and smoothed out rough edges on the receiver casting. Polished a rough chamber. Finally the action was smooth like the completely reliable but worn out M-1 Carbines I used in the Army 5 decades ago.
          Lots of bad magazines–the furnished 15 rounder was worthless. The after market Korean 30 round ones weren’t too bad. The really good ones came from Fulton Armory. The better M-Pro 7 synthetic oil works well.
          Works great now! 4X scope and long range green laser / light combo under the barrel on a Barska clamp. Deadly accurate! Turned into a retirement project for this old Grey Panther!
          Lots of the CTD users report good operation with the AQ ammo. Only a few reported problems with AO Clone Carbines were reported. Possibly too tight a chamber on mine? Possibly O.K. in actual Military carbines. I also bought a case length check block–the AQ ammo looks good in it, as do the other maker’s ammo. I can’t find a chamber checker block for testing ammo. However–no more AQ ammo for me!

  • Robert Sweeney March 20, 2017, 9:58 am

    I don’t usually watch the videos when there’s a full text review to read, but since the author has made an issue about watching the whole video here in the comments I went ahead and watched. And yes, Mr. Helinski, the full 34 minutes and 25 seconds.

    I had already seen the original review video, and I must say that it did come off as a hit piece. It seemed as if Clay had started off just opening the box and hating the sight of the gun and making up his mind to trash it. Too many personal taste issues were used to condemn the gun without any real objective reasons given as to how or why they would compromise function. Who cares if the reviewer won’t buy a gun with a wider than average slide? Maybe I don’t care about the width. Maybe I LIKE extra wide guns! Simply note the fact and get on with how well the gun WORKS!

    I find Mr. Helinski’s review to be fairer, but perhaps a bit too apologetic. Especially concerning the possibility of failures to function with ammo other than 115mm. Personally, I would never buy a gun for self defense, or even for plinking, that couldn’t reliably feed all common bullet weights and shapes available for that caliber. For serious competition shooting, sure, but not in my everyday guns. Other than being just a little solicitous toward Remington, the review of the gun’s features, functions and flaws was fair and balanced. Guns are made to a price point, like it or not, and the bottom line is how well do they function in real life compared to other guns at that price point? I believe that Mr. Helinski clearly demonstrated that, while the RP9 is not “a piece of shit”, the Ruger American is a better gun at the same price point. After watching the video, I came to the conclusion that the Remington falls somewhere between the Ruger and a Hi Point in style, function and value. Personally, when it comes down to a final decision at this particular price point for a full size 9mm handgun, I’d have to choose between one Ruger or two Hi Points. Fortunately I don’t have to make that choice, and I could spend the $400 on ammo (of pretty much any weight and shape) for my S&W 659.

    And I do agree with those who complained about the foul language. It’s unprofessional and unnecessary. Yes, there are a fair share of imbeciles and keyboard commandos who comment without real knowledge on all of these Internet blogs, but you shouldn’t sink to their level in reply. And you should never be so rude and dismissive to those who simply want to discuss their disagreement.

    • Paul Helinski March 20, 2017, 10:01 am

      Clay’s review was not the hit piece. He just honestly said how he felt about the gun, but he compared it to guns that were in an entirely different class.

  • MB March 20, 2017, 9:48 am

    I am not a gun reviewer, a Youtube content provider, gun store owner or have any connection with the industry, an “operator” or any LEO, I am a gun purchaser. I will buy a gun on how well it fits my criteria, if it does, I but, if not I don’t. My criteria is a simple one, will it function when I need it to, is it not overly complicated or over engineered, does it fit my hand, and is affordable. If it doesn’t pass those test, it stays on the store shelf. I don’t rely completely on gun shop personnel, but I have never been lied to or pushed to something I didn’t want. When I bought my first pistol, I spoke to a couple of different gun shops, then went home and looked at forums and reviews and research the manufacturer, decided that what the gun shop told me could be substantiated, and I bought the gun. Zero regrets. FNH FNX-9, about 4,000 rounds down the barrel, not one FTF, FTE, or any other behavior that could cost me my life, or cost someone else theirs because of UD/ND. Based on what I have read, seen and heard, there is zero chance I would ever purchase a Remington RP9 or R51 because they could cost me my life. I am pretty sure most other gun purchasers would feel the same way. I buy a gun for life and liberty, not because it looks cool or because some Youtuber says everyone should, or some camo-tacticoolie says your a looser if you don’t have the latest tactical trendy gun.

  • Mark Tercsak March 20, 2017, 9:43 am

    To be Blunt I’am not a fan of fantastic plastic handguns.
    I’am a all steel gun guy.

    I have owned my share though, The Smith & Wesson 99 chambered in 45 auto, The frame in my opinion was to light and not stiff enough esp the Grip, the decocker was almost out of reach for the thumb of the shooting hand, I thought recoil was a little excessive, but controllable and it worked every time you pulled the trigger, all Smith & Wesson needed to do was re-engineer the frame/grip , Field stripping was fairly simple process.

    Smith & Wesson M&P 45 Auto, as per the frame a major improvement over the Smith & Wesson 99, it felt solid almost like a steel handgun and it felt good, until I, bought it took it to the range and shot it, the recoil impulse felt, like someone was driving a railroad spike through the palm of my hand. I’d rather shoot my .480 Ruger than shoot the M&P, I changed the Grips only receiving slight improvement. At least for me Grip shape is a factor and I told them so thought they should also offer a 1911 style grip shape for the M&P and they told me to get lost, I would have bought one their loss. The other negative is the stupid tool, that they say you need to field strip this pistol, you need the tool to push down on a lever located inside the ejection port, how stupid is that, your in a gunfight something goes wrong with your piece and you need to strip it to fix it, you have to pull out this tool first to hit this lever and when all is said in done you have to reinsert the tool and lets not forget the magazine and also chamber a round, I will say this though, never found a time or need to do an emergency field strip of this pistol though.

    HK-45 USP- For me this is the best of the fantastic Plastic Handguns in 45 that I owned and without question have shot, I feel the USP, I owned was a little light in the grip, like the above, however; the grip shape and angle of the grip was excellent the recoil was perfect, it was also one of the most inherently accurate pistols, I have ever shot, field stripping no tools but your hands required.

    Seriously if you want a 45 fantastic Plastic Handgun- Hk models are the best period.

    To me the Fantastic Plastic Handguns design is meant for 9mm.
    To me the best 9mm fantastic Plastic Handgun is the Styer Pistols
    I would say the slide is a little thick and they could improve upon the slide searations on the slide, to me it has the best combat sights of any pistol, I have ever owned the line up fast and our accurate. tHIS PISTOL WAS THE EASIEST TO FIELD STRIP, on the right side of the pistol located above the trigger, on the frame, is a push button and a lever, for you numbnuts out their yes you unload the pistol first take the magazine out and tripple check. Push the Button in and rotate the lever down, slide the slide off the frame.

    • John Bibb March 20, 2017, 1:15 pm

      HI MT–I’ve been really pleased with the accuracy and reliability of my Taurus 709 Slim 9mm. 3″ barrel pistol and my Springfield Armory XD .45 ACP 5″ barrel pistols. Shooting 50 rounds though each at the range doesn’t bother my 75 year old hands at all. They seem to be very good reliable pistols. First “plastic” pistols I’ve ever owned. I’ve fired more than 500 rounds through both with only 2 or 3 failures to fire (hard primers?) and a few failures to chamber (weak powder charge?)
      Also low prices for quality guns! The stainless steel / plastic XD also has the grip safety like the 1911–much smaller than on the 1911. It seems like the perfect replacement pistol for our Military–although like the Glock–no thumb safety. Which ain’t gonna happen either.
      John Bibb

  • Rich W. March 20, 2017, 9:41 am

    A Hi-Point is more reliable than the RP9 and that makes the latter a piece of crap. I am truly sorry if Remington, and their apologists, cannot accept this simple truth.

  • Scott March 20, 2017, 9:27 am

    WOW, Paul you have sunk to a new low in your review of the RP9! I have NEVER seen so many excuses for obvious manufacturing- engineering flaws in my life! You may not give a sh_t, but you have just lost whatever credibility you may have had left with gun enthusiasts. Most of us have a brain of our own, so your repeated ad nauseum polishing of this particular turd, will NOT change the fact it is still a TURD.

  • MJB March 20, 2017, 9:14 am

    Remington hasn’t made a quality piece since their model 11. Their trademark is stamped junk with little quality control. I remember buying an 11-87 from my dealer about 20 years ago and it took about 5 guns to finally get one without finish flaws such as scratches or vent rib blemishes. I use their ammo though, it’s good but I am done with their firearms.

  • ToddB March 20, 2017, 9:06 am

    Sorry but when Remington calls and ‘asks’ not to run a story making their product look bad, they know it has problems. Gun magazines are bought and paid for so cant offer decent reviews of anything. So all we have short of volunteering to be a guinea pig by buying said gun, we depend on other people to review them. People who are not paid shills for what ever company it is.

    I saw how the overly large slide was compared to a rock chucker press, and how nobody cares its over engineered. Yea but nobody carries a rock chucker press around on a holster now do they? Its bolted to a bench and if its overly big who cares. Remington put a 45 slide on a 9mm, why? Maybe they intend on coming out with a 45 version later, so friggin what. Every other company can manage to do a little extra machining to lighten a 9mm slide, so can Remington.

    And so what if its picky about ammo? Blame the reloads? Odd my 9mm pistols eat a steady diet of home made ammo, they dont seem to care. Not are they finicky about what weight a bullet is or if its FMJ or not. I wont own an auto loader that’s picky, it either feeds what ever I grab off the shelf, as it should, or I get rid of it. Cheap or expensive, still the same. I got rid of that clunker sig P250 as it liked to jam. So either Remington can do the work and make a gun reliable, or they can keep it.

    I also saw in the video how the ambi slide lock is near useless. Don’t go thinking its just Remington that failed to notice that. I looked at a new sig P320, it did the same thing. Just bent out of the way vs releasing the slide. I don’t want to hear ‘well its not supposed to release the slide, its a slide lock’. Then don’t bother putting it on there. And its odd, my FNS40, the ‘slide lock’ works from either side. But they didnt cheap out and make it a lock on just one side with a piece of sheet metal connecting it. FN has a solid part and a notch in both sides of the slide.

    Look just face it Remington sells crap now. They put out the obviously flawed R51, come on people were finding the rear sights laying in the box, or couldn’t even cycle the slide on some new ones. We gonna excuse GM if they sell a truck that wont roll? I see it everywhere, how Remingtons quality has gone to crap. ARs that dont shoot straight, but Remington refuses to fix as they are ‘acceptable’. With past issues, Remington should have made sure their new gun was perfect, but apparently they didn’t care. So long as some of them worked….sometimes…w certain ammo. Guess they figured paid for glowing reviews in gun magazines would be enough, and they would just ask negative reviews to not be printed. Does S&W do that? Ruger? No they actually make a decent product to begin with.

  • Jeffrey L. Frischkorn March 20, 2017, 9:03 am

    I guess this is why we are blessed with so many choices from so many different firearms companies producing so many different gun models… Vive la difference!

  • Richard March 20, 2017, 8:55 am

    WTF, Sounds like an apology to Remington and specifically not trying to piss off Clay in the process

  • Bob March 20, 2017, 8:46 am

    Reading the posts on here make me embarrassed to call myself a gun owner. Illiterate people calling people illiterate while claiming to be intelligent, incoherent sentences everywhere and general ignorance.

    • Mark G Coffey March 20, 2017, 11:01 am

      Are you just now humiliated by gun owners? I’ve always been a bit humiliated by proud ignorance when it rears its head. All the same, I never bother to comment. I felt the need to applaud your effort. America has a tremendous problem with ignorance, misinformation and especially the aforementioned: being proud of it!
      With it, a sense of no compromise and dualistic stupidity. That too becomes evident in these comments.

      I’ll hang my hat on J.M. Browning’s engineering should the need ever arise. But the Net’s full of those labeling him a fool too. It’s obvious what needs to be ignored.

  • mka March 20, 2017, 8:36 am

    I ask Gol again to monitor the language used on this forum. Ladies(of which the writer probably has no experience with) read or
    start to read this filthy diatribe as do our older children. Ignorant rants have no place in a legitimate forum

  • Dave March 20, 2017, 8:35 am

    Correction. The biggest mistake you made was hiring Hillary lover Jorge Amselle to write for you. The RP 9 is a distant second.

  • JungleCogs March 20, 2017, 8:33 am

    All you have done by highlighting both articles is to show that none of you are reliable sources (or you need to fire a few writers and your editors).

  • DrcOhio March 20, 2017, 8:32 am

    I’m glad Remington has gotten back in the handgun game, but they still have a ways to go before I would consider buying anything but thier R1911.

  • Creed March 20, 2017, 8:29 am

    I did not finish the article once it became apparent that the author has trouble expressing himself without filthy language. It is unprofessional and helps support the image that the liberal media likes to promote.

  • Mark Davis March 20, 2017, 8:27 am

    You keep pushing the low price point as a reason to expect less. That’s pathetic. This is a firearm. There are lots of cheap pistols out there that absolutely suck and don’t qualify as firearms due to lack of reliability. If it has FFE, FTF, light primer strikes, etc, it should be fixed before it hits the store shelves. It sounds simply like Remington’s parent company, like many others, cranks out something with a name stamp for a $$$. Those times are coming to an end thankfully, because there are a lot of competitors coming up that will knock these lazy bastards off the rockers. I have not personally shot the pistol and am now going to go see for myself. Keep in mind though, a lot of us watch reviews so as to not waste our hard earned money on a polished turd. The rebuttal was pretty sad. Did Remington threaten you guys at GA, or we’re there some crisp Benjamin’s involved?

  • RetiredCop March 20, 2017, 8:11 am

    I saw the negative videos early on. But wanted to give the RP9 the benefit of the doubt, so bought one. Figured it would be a good robust knock around CCW and/or vehicle carry tool. Not concerned about how pretty it was. I had the same failure to feed and jamming issues that others had. Returned it to the dealer for a refund. Will not trust my or my family’s life to a firearm with a personal malfunction history. I teach with, own, & carry Glock, S&W, SigSauer, Cols, RIA, Remington (I earned Distinguished Expert – Pistol with an R1, I shoot 1858s for SASS, have a rolling block). Do not have a vendetta against Big Green, nor did I want a firearm I owned to fail! Was highly disappointed.

    • Will Drider March 20, 2017, 11:56 pm

      Thanks for your end user account. It has been reported that Remington is having Distributors return remaining stock to the Factory. This would not happen just because of some bad press that was unsubstantiated.

  • Erik Goodwin March 20, 2017, 8:08 am

    You give a gun for someone to review, then after the company that made the gun contacts you, you post a rebuttal and trash the reviewer. You have lost total validity. Zero respect from now on as a journalist. Bought and paid for. Shill.

  • Lynn Warner Dornan March 20, 2017, 8:08 am

    I read the reviews on this website including the one under discussion here. I understand that a gun review is just that. It is the authors opinion on what he has found after test firing the weapon. Why anyone would try to justify or not another’s opinion is beyond me. I would have rather you had reviewed the gun yourself rather than try to justify another’s review. I will continue to read both of your reviews in the future and hopefully we all can learn from this experience.

  • Joe Scmoe March 20, 2017, 7:24 am

    You are all idiots and have the attitude that is killing America. If you dont like the articles hear or anywhere else don’t read them. Go do the research and form your own opinions don’t recycle someone elses and just to reduce my comment to the lowest common denominator like everything else in Amurica. Go fuck yourselves you whiney ignorant bastards that grew up in the generarion where everbody has to be a winner and all the schools and everybody else in your lives have taught you the false reality and sense of entitlement that the world owes you something. Let me set you all straight the world dosent owe you shit you are not all winners your all losers the only good thing about you idiots is if society does collapse you will die off very quickly. Go whine to Hillary and get the fuck off Guns America if not the planet.

    • Chick March 20, 2017, 8:23 am

      Well, here we have an apparent doomsday prepper, that not only is illiterate, by his own post, but an attack artist of others and their opinion. There are many of us here that are not only intelligent gun enthusiasts, but have also been that since you were in diapers. Go dry off behind your ears.

  • STEVE WINN March 20, 2017, 7:24 am


    • Hulon Lane March 20, 2017, 8:16 am

      My Walther PPK has never failed to perform either. It’s a French made weapon mfg. just before the war. It’s a 7.65mm. I wish I could find a similar 9mm. They are great little guns that have stood the test of time. thanks.

      • Mike March 20, 2017, 10:27 am

        Walther PPS can be had in 9mm. My everyday carry gun and in my experience totally reliable.

  • Robert Hanlin March 20, 2017, 7:16 am

    Personally I was glad to see the video and have no problem with it’s title. I recently attended a gun show in my area and went looking for an RP9 to put my hands on to see if there was any validity to all the negative press this things been getting across the interwebz.. There were none to be had! Not a single RP9 OR the other ,so called Remington disappointment, R51! In any event, what I’m walking away with here is a positive honest appraisal of a firearm that was NEVER, like you said, meant to compete in the high range market! People cannot expect to buy a VW and get Porsche performance! I’ve been on the fence with this gun ever since it first came out. Now I’m going to purchase one… Good report and nice video!

  • Phillip March 20, 2017, 7:05 am

    What is a milometer?

    • Roger March 20, 2017, 8:09 am

      It’s a typographical error that was not caught and changed. You know that. I think.

      • Glenn Thomas March 20, 2017, 9:32 am

        It’s the increments that Yiannopoulos uses to measure with.

  • Michael Silverman March 20, 2017, 6:44 am

    I find MAC tries to consistently and fairly review firearms. Further MAC is not the only shooter and many fire off camera to validate findings. He alludes to this and I witnessed it once as a guest of another channel where MAC was present and offered me one of the guns he was preparing to review.

    One can get a defective gun. One can get defective ammunition. Few can afford multiple samples of each. Few have the resources or connections to get a replacement.

  • loupgarous March 20, 2017, 6:40 am

    You didn’t answer the issues Clay raised about things like the left slide release not working. That’s not a “oh, this was the third gun he’d reviewed that day” issue, it’s fit, form and function.
    I actually thought Clay’s review of the RP9 was a welcome departure from the “Oh, come see this gun the manufacturers gave us – damn, but this is a nice firearm!” school of gun journalism. Now you’ve reverted to that.
    Tell me, did Remington ever send you an RP9 with a working left slide release? Or with the other issues Clay mentioned fixed? Or is this how you’re assuring that Remington ever sends you a review gun again?

  • Jeff March 20, 2017, 6:08 am

    Wow, we have been blessed with a crappy initial review of the RP9 and now a similarly crappy rebuttal of that crappy review. You had me at the title with, “The Remington RP9 is NOT a Piece of SHIT”… Classy… To be fair, the fact that both articles were embarrassingly sucky is in keeping with the fact that the Remington RP9 is also embarrassingly sucky so at least there’s some consistency going on here. LMFAO!

    • Jason March 20, 2017, 7:07 am

      Both articles address what I think overall of the company!

  • akjc77 March 20, 2017, 5:49 am

    May as well throw in my worthless opinion too!! Simply this gun was kinda hyped a little bit as something new and exciting which in all fairness all Brands of any product do but with Remington well there is atlesst hope or chance this could be true since they have the $$ to put behind it. So I’m not sure I’m totally buying the Econo niche market thing? A $300 $400 pistol should be easier than ever to make that still has operator and consumer input in, frankly guys we shouldn’t see these plastic guns no matter how great they are getting higher n higher in price with no real new features and yes reliability in a carry gun is priceless but in the age of CNC in the land of production you should expect to get more for less. I just can’t see anything here but the business men of a company that didn’t really try to think about the consumer and do their homework like they should? They simply just didn’t go do the footwork to ask folks what features we want. Cause what fool would buy a gun they didn’t like cause it was $100 less? I’d simply wait save the extra cash and be happy with my purchase! These suits at Remington have nobody but themselves to blame. Which is sad for their employees cause they are already laying off just from fact that the 2amend. Isn’t in threat the next 4 years perhaps they didn’t see that coming either? At any rate there are too many great guns out there in the used area can be had for under $300 ya catch a man hard up that these gun companies better learn fast to start giving us more bang for our buck and really do their homework down to every last detail bout what we are looking for!

  • Milton March 20, 2017, 5:48 am

    Ouch. I have a feeling you’re going to regret posting this “rebuttal” to the original review just from the few comments so far. I can’t imagine the NYT (fake) or Breitbart (real) posting an entirely new story that completely contradicts a previously published story. Heck, they don’t even do that with Op-Eds. They might publish a correction, or such. If you’re going to publish an article to say that your original author was full of crap, it at least better be a well-written one. But not so… this is poorly-written. *sigh* No, you guys have obviously caved to pressure from Remington. How sad. I enjoy reading about new guns here, but now don’t feel like I can trust anything you say; so I just won’t waste my time any more.

    • Todd March 20, 2017, 9:29 am

      I think Clay is going to kick his ass for calling him a liar more or less.
      And the author doesn’t even have enough backbone to type the word God.

      • singleshotcajun March 20, 2017, 12:01 pm

        I just read Mr. Helsinki’s reply to this.
        “Because there are halachic opinions that it is forbidden to erase any name of G-d in any language, and I don’t want to encourage it when you close the page because you are upset by the filthy language. There is no comparable opinion on swear words.”
        I did not think of that, I can respect it.

  • Rick March 20, 2017, 5:38 am

    I through reading street corner talk with these typed up not needed cuss words. Good luck with all your future endeavors.

  • Steve Fornelius March 20, 2017, 5:19 am

    Funny how Remington just laid off 140 people from the upper management isn’t it. Perhaps because none of them actually have tried shooting their firearms and are all “suits” with no idea of how people compare reviews and the feel of the guns at a gunstore before laying out hundreds for something they may or may not find to their liking.

    • Mark Tercsak March 20, 2017, 8:31 am

      Remington laid off 140 suits? First correct thing they have done in my life time!

  • Chick March 20, 2017, 5:16 am

    Why does any manufacture make a second full size handgun? To do this is to admit something was wrong with the first one. Can you imagine Remington building a second pump action shotgun (other than a 870)? Of course not! On a second note, the author\’s language is not where close to being acceptable in these publications. For him to use those terms, or his editor to approve them, is below second class.

    • Mark Tercsak March 20, 2017, 8:37 am

      It was the first author who called this handgun a piece of shit!
      To me it’s about time we have some honest Georgie Pattonesique reviews!

      • Big John March 20, 2017, 12:16 pm

        Plus one…I stand with Clay, call a spade a spade the RP9 is a piece of shit!

        Post “Freedom Group” Remington has become a fertilizer factory, they don’t even back up their products anymore through their Warranty Service. I’ve had several customers come to me to repair genuine mfg. defects that Remington wanted to charge outrageous sums to correct from the factory. I’m a former Remington employee, ran a former Remington Warranty Station, I’ve been a full time Gunsmith for decades and a professional trigger puller for Uncle Sugar before that. I was a “YUGE” Remington fan, and still am for their older products BUT they rushed to the bottom to compete on pricing with Mossberg, Ruger and Savage instead of sticking to their “affordable quality” nitch, now the other three companies are kicking their ass…BAD.

        Remington sucks now, Bushaster sucks now, Marlin sucks now, DPMS sucks now…what’s the common denominator? Hmmmmmmmmm

  • Vince Black March 20, 2017, 5:08 am

    It’s quite clear the RP9 needs a some tweaking.
    Paul, buddy relax. People are going after an article you wrote not you personally. You will catch more flies with honey than vinegar. If I said or posted the things you have here I would get fired instantly. I have bought and sold many guns via Guns America.
    Until you post a formal apology and or are fired I will “boycott” Guns America. Be a man and swallow your pride.

    • Will Drider March 21, 2017, 12:43 am

      Paul IS the Boss/Owner last time I checked. He makes the Rules and sets the standards.

  • Paul Bester March 20, 2017, 4:18 am

    It is comical that you would defend the inferior quality of Remington’s RP9 by saying that it isn’t in the $500-600 price range like the M&P 2.0, it is only in the $400 price range. LEO Glocks have been available in the low $400 range forever, and they set the standard for handgun reliability. The idea that a company of Remington’s (former) reputation would, for any reason, intentionally put out an inferior firearm for any reason is absolutely ridiculous. Based on what you wrote in your article, you believe that Remington put out a handgun that fits the same niche in the market as the M&P, the XD/M, Glocks, Sigs, etc., but it was not meant to compete with them? That does not make much sense, and it certainly makes it seem that there is more at stake here than just positive review of a questionable firearm.

    • STEVE WINN March 20, 2017, 7:31 am


  • Lktimpanaro March 20, 2017, 4:13 am

    This really makes me cringe. It’s not even a review of the RP9 but a review of reviews! I don’t what this guy says, if a $400 handgun has this many problems for this many people out of the box then it is NOT a good weapon, period. I don’t know any shooters experienced or not who “check for burrs” in a brand new magazine. Good magazines are not hard to make. I actually love Remington rifles but their handguns are…Well fill in the blank. I understand what the author is trying to say about the price point and about low budget self defense but there are MANY other proven reliable lower budget options out there. For goodness sake buy used if you can’t buy new but buy QUALITY!

  • The_Truth. March 20, 2017, 3:10 am

    Wow Paul sure does Get Butt Hurt awful easy.

    • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:37 am

      Yeah, that is a sign of too much ego and not enough age. There are a ton of people that are firearms knowledgeable, that know more than someone who writes about it, or sells firearms. Some of these guys think the sun of knowledge rises and sets in their head, and no one else has a valid opinion. These article stinks of being influenced by Remington. just as many other are.

  • Mike Madaus March 19, 2017, 11:58 am

    Always enjoy the info from all of your articals. This one has a lot of questions in my mind though.
    Did you or Guns America get so much heat from Remington you had to do a Back Slide artical to make sure the dollars keep coming in from them?
    What you say about this new gun of theirs is , It’s a good gun, need to shoot only 115gr ammo. It must also be shot in weather of 65 to 82 degrees . Like it was cold and Clay couldn’t give a good review because of that. You can only use a certian type of ammo and size. COME ON!!! I want a gun that can be used in many ways!
    Clay should not be blamed for anything for telling it like he sees it. That is what he is paid to do, and that’s what he did!
    My question is why is Remington producing a NEW GUN , when thay can’t get the other one right? I figured that after the Gen I- R-51 They would wait a long time and put out the BEST GEN II anyone would ever want. So I purchased the Gen II . They would have been better off just letting it die, and hope all would have forgot about it. Now it is not a surprise that they produce another BOAT ANCHOR.
    Your long winded artical with all the facts and excusses can’t hide the fact that you can’t POLISH A TURD.
    I will never purchase another Remington Hand Gun. EVER!
    My R-51 does keep the boat in place though.


    • Paul Helinski March 19, 2017, 2:29 pm

      Why don’t you actually watch the video and listen to what I say.

      • Chick March 20, 2017, 5:20 am

        Paul, how do you know he did not watcht he video and listen to what you had to say. You seem awful combative to constructive comments. You seem too full of yourself, and need to grow up a bit.

  • Jon Hodoway March 17, 2017, 9:30 pm

    Full Disclosure I write for Guns America on a regular basis. What I am saying now has not been requested nor approved save for allowing the comment to run.
    Both Paul and Clay offer unique points of view on a variety of subjects. I have been the recipient of attacks based on what I had to say and how I said it. Most recently I was critiqued based on the press of my polo shirt.
    When it comes to the video and article Paul makes lots of great points that I am hard pressed to find fault with. Paul has owned what was at best were nitpicking errors that ALL gun reviews make to one degree or another. Clay is an adult that has shown his metal is more than sufficient to weather some words with a difference of opinion of a pistol.
    There are a few points that Paul made but I will echo
    1. Each review carries the bias of the author based on his experience. Clay has an impressive military background and competition. This show in his reviews. I have a background in civilian law enforcement and competition. Paul freely admits his background is a gun toting civilian and still a different branch of competition. To quote Malcom Gladwell “Experts Differ”
    2. When it comes to cars if you compared a 15,000.00-economy box to a 90,000 Luxury Sports car everyone would cry foul. Why does the gun culture not accept that price points have a different expectation? Function is valid expectation at all price points and Paul did show this in spades.
    3. The only money (and never a gun) that I have received has been for the work I produced and only from the people who ran the article. I have refused to review some guns. I have written articles that my editor has challenged me to give more facts for my negative take on the gun but they have never refused to run a review. I have received ammunition to shoot but I have bought way more than I have been given.
    When I get a valid comment on the content of the article or how the gun was tested I try to answer. I was always told if they call you a dog look and see if you have a tail if not I move on. But the insults and silly comments lead me to what James Yeager one said I wish these words were mine but they are not.
    “When I was a Cop I was taught if I build a WEAK case the defense team will attack the case. But, if I build a STRONG case, they will attack me. The internet is the same. I make a good case with the info in my videos so the haters attack me on a personal level. I would let this upset me but I get distracted living my f**king awesome life. That is how I know I win”. -James Yeager

    • Chick March 20, 2017, 5:23 am

      I am getting to the conclusion that the gun rag writers here, think they they are the only ones that have a clue about firearms and the rest of us are suppose to march behind what ever they say. I am also had just about enough of their slanted writing, that is influenced by the gun industry.

    • Link Lackluster March 20, 2017, 7:12 am

      This rebuttal of Clay’s review is sad. Sounds like the suits at Cerberus threatened with a lawsuit? Paul’s review is lame. Jon Hodoway uses the word “metal” instead of “mettle”. Paul thinks airplanes fly around the world 24/7 changing our global environment by spreading “climate change dust”.

      This isn’t exactly an overtly intellectual site, but it can be fun to see new guns. It’s not often fun to read the drivel.

      Clay’s review was spot on, I think, and I appreciate his informed perspective. He is still alive to deliver his perspective, in part, because his tools worked out in the field. I think that is important.

      This site is getting to be a waste of my time.

    • Charles Valenzuela March 20, 2017, 10:03 am

      Just because your case is “strong”, doesn’t make it correct or true. When it is clearly biased, why wouldn’t the defense attack that bias? Just more attacks on the commenters, so I’ll lump you in with Hellinski.

  • kees kuylman March 17, 2017, 5:02 pm

    i would like to second the comment about language. It just does not help when you are trying to build a logical case.

  • Will Drider March 17, 2017, 4:35 pm

    Paul, You said comments would remain open yet I sent a lenghty comment which was not Posted, I added to that comment and posted again. Both said pending moderation but did not show up! Surely you read it disagreed with a lot of you rebuttal but t wasn’t nasty, name calling or foul mouthed. So much for a open exchange of opinions on your blog. Would you address why it didn’t make the cut? Your rubuttle was slanted to say the least but I didn’t address that. Nw you censor honest debate which did not contain personal attacks like you rebuttle did. This further protectionism of Remington against criticism only puts fuel on the fire that your in Remingtons pocket.

    I noticed two other things: your rebuttle has been pushed off the title page and older stories remain instead of the normal new over old rotation. Your rebuttle was contentious and sure to draw a lot of comments as you said so your self. Where are they Paul? The silence of censorship is deafening.
    I request you fix whatever administrative oversite or moderation limbo your putting comments in and Post them. Better to post it here then elsewhere. Respond here or send me a message.

    • Paul Helinski March 17, 2017, 5:24 pm

      Maybe because we have fucking lives and don’t sit and approve comments all day Will. Hint Hint.

      • Mitch Rapp March 20, 2017, 5:50 am

        I guess when you, Mr. Helinski, can’t refute the reasonable comments made by Mr Drider you respond by making a feeble attempt to insult him personally. Either you are incredibly thin skinned or what Mr Drider said was completely true and accurate and you don’t want to admit that he was right. Which is it?

        • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:42 am

          The use of foul language in these articles, do nothing to prop up the article or facts. The writer and the editor need to leave that mess out.

      • Charles Valenzuela March 20, 2017, 10:08 am

        Your vulgar remarks about the commenters just re-enforces my opinion of you and your “style”.

    • R.E. Tired November 1, 2017, 6:00 pm

      Hey ! I thought I was the only one getting the “no post” service. I “rebutted” Play-Doh on numerous occasions….not one post. For the record–No swearing or personal attacks in any of my replies.

  • SL FREEMAN March 17, 2017, 12:47 pm

    So then, it boils down to ” wowser youtube comandos. This here gun is 4 or 5 mm wider than that there one what I likes.” Therin its a POS. Im so cool I almost typed a nasty word.

  • Zack Westmoland March 17, 2017, 12:43 pm

    Why is “god” edited in the article but “fucking” is not?

    • Paul Helinski March 17, 2017, 5:26 pm

      Because there are halachic opinions that it is forbidden to erase any name of G-d in any language, and I don’t want to encourage it when you close the page because you are upset by the filthy language. There is no comparable opinion on swear words.

      • Blasted Cap March 20, 2017, 6:34 am

        Sure there is, don’t include them in the first place. It’s another sign of lack of intelligence. Plenty of other words in the good old Webster’s dictionary.

        • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:44 am

          It is a sign of ignorance, in that the writer cannot find any other words in his vocabulary, to describe his opinion.

  • SuperG March 17, 2017, 12:28 pm

    It is a moot point if the gun is or is not a POS, as the brand name has been sullied beyond repair. A once proud trademark of quality American firearms, greedy CEO’s cheapened and soiled the product, and produced junk. They have taken their millions and moved on, leaving the husk of a once great company. Sadly, it is a lame horse that should be put out of its misery, as wise consumers no longer trust the name. Other companies should take note, but greed and the need to “maximize profit and have record quarters, every quarter” will ruin them too. It is an unhealthy business model model adopted in the early 80’s that is unsustainable, but when you are given a golden parachute even if you fail, why would you care?

  • Will Drider March 17, 2017, 11:13 am

    Wow! Whats the real reason behind this Paul? Can’t Remington speak for themselves? This article comes across as an attack ad on other professionals while showing the VP9 still has unacceptable issues. Your recent review of the Chinese Coach gun was about the same level as Clays VP9 review: the good, the bad and ugly.
    Does the RP9 Owners manual say don’t use 124grain 9mm? No. Heavier 9mm bullets are very common contrary to your claim, hit ammobot and see. You fail to address the obvious difference in velocity verses slide mass/recoil spring which affect function. Cherry picking HPs with small or plugged cavities and sharp taper mask the problem users will encounter. Wide mouth HP get hung up on the uneven transition to the feed ramp, how is your “factory gun”
    Is the RP9 advertised as having a ambi slide release (we assume that means on that works)? Yes, does it? No. Does a quality manufacture let that kind of defect continue in production and offer no recall/fix. Screw the leftys and if you loose use of your right hand you better know other methods to release the slide.
    Does it slide lock on last round? Intermittently. If it slows you down, it has the potential to get you killed.
    The mags are oversizes for cartridge length. Fine if everything stays in place. What happens when they are shifted to the front? Doesn’t mag dimensions drive grip size minimums even with inserts?
    Over-engineered? Why would a company build oversized mags, a large and heavy slide (for the caliber) and do the same with a “chassis” thats not removable? Even raw metal = $. It only makes sense when using most of the same toolong to make a .45 but possibly a poor mans 10mm or 38Super too. Some how in all the measurement comparisons, it never hit the scales.

    I’m not a MAC subscriber, but in researching firearms, I’ve veiwed a dozen or so vids of his. From your comments on his expertise, I don’t think you have. You discredit his expertise soley on his VP9 review? That pretty bias considering you are defending Remington. I’ve seen his reviews on guns I own or have owned and he is spot on. He brought up a problem on one of mine that I didn’t know, checked it and he was right! He reviews and tests them very thoroughly and consistently. Sadly few of your contributing authors near that level and I have addressed that several times before.

    Clay is a breath of fresh air in the stagnation of reviews here. Yes, he is rough around the edges, calls it as he sees it, makes no excuses or generalizations to fudge accolades where not deserved. To be clear Clay is to gun reviews what Trump is to politics. Don’t screw the pooch on this, let Clay do his thing.

    My last point is when you buy a gun off the shelf, you get an example of what any buyer could end up with good or bad. And good manufactures do let bad guns out, unintentionally we hope. Does anyone thinks review guns or demo guns at Shot Show, or media events were just pulled randomly off the line and sent without having been carefully checked out and tweaked? Be realistic, its business and they are damn well going to try and make it a favorable as possible, wouldn’t you. So the Factory sends MAC a second gun and you one too. Hummm. They work but still have bugs ant those guns were more then likely given special attention. MAC was not the only INDEPENDENT reviewer with VP9 problems, there were several. Neither MAC nor Clay have the power to kill the VP9. The VP9 stands on its own pros and cons as Remington produced it FOR THE PUBLIC. It does not matter that Remington made it to compete with the Ruger at price point. The fact is the VP9 will be compaired to a wider field. Like most handguns it is primarly for a defensive role but even at its lower pirce point its flaws make it unsuitable in a life or death scenario. Add to that Remingtons other pistol line problems, and the bad press over the lawsuit for a bad trigger (by their own documents) they have been using for decades while paying out of Court settlements (cheaper the total replacement). Other then their shotguns, Remington has lost a lot of trust and buyer confidence. The VP9s quality and marketing are problems that sit squarely in Remingtons lap and not on the sholders of those that do a service to the gun community reviewing them.

    • Barron Tilsdary March 19, 2017, 7:59 pm

      I dont get why people crap on the vp9 gauntlet test. Tim says it is for entertainment and he has one sample. He says and admits this.. His videos are for gathering info and taking a sample of what others have to say.

      Now language. I mean idk what to say about that. They are just words….

    • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:45 am

      Good review, Will.

  • mka March 17, 2017, 10:37 am

    Perhaps the rebuttal could have been made without the filthy language. I would appreciate editing from gol
    in the future as this gutter language helps the anti’s affirm there point of ignorant red-knecks.

    • Tom March 17, 2017, 2:58 pm

      I am with you 100% that the filthy gutter talk in a written piece destroys any expectation of professional. That language may be what to expect in video ( Clay’s -which I stopped watching) but I should NOT have to expect it in what should be a professional rebuttal.
      To the author here – Paul Helinski – I say “take the high road and have some class”.

      • Paul Helinski March 17, 2017, 5:25 pm

        Oh no, that’s awful. Oh yea, I remember now. Go fuck yourself.

        • Ed H. March 20, 2017, 10:08 am

          I had stopped watching Clay’s stuff because of his unnecessary vulgarity. If you don’t have enough respect for your readers to act with decency and respect towards us when it’s easy to do so, then how can we trust anything you write?

          What you have just done is demonstrate that Clay was just a symptom of a more general lack of decency at GA. It’s too bad, too. I liked GA’s choice of topics and generally quality writing. As a principle, I think it’s good to get a variety of perspectives and your articles served that purpose very well. But abusing every reader, even as collateral damage as in this case, is not acceptable.

          I wish you well, but I’m done.

    • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:46 am

      Exactly right mka. That language has no place in these articles.

      • Willy-O March 20, 2017, 11:06 am

        That is YOUR (over-stated) opinion – give it a f’n rest already. FYI :
        • yes, I’m a “redneck”
        • yes, I’m pro-gun/2nd Amend
        • I’m also a former cop – what have you “contributed” ?
        • also a college graduate that has been known to use such harsh language and is NOT hyper-sensitive to same. Many times there simply isn’t a suitable substitute or replacement to relay the same level of intensity.

  • Legacy820 March 17, 2017, 6:41 am

    After reading your article and watching your video on this pistol, my only real observation is there has to be some unseen velvet hammer that motivated this exercise. I read/view and for the most part, like the reviews you guys do. But this is more of an apology to a firm with deep pockets than anything else. That and you finding yourself publishing what appears to be a “hit piece” on another reviewer for doing what you describe as a “hit piece” on Remington.

    Bottom line is the RP9 is a dog that should be allowed to pass quietly into the obscurity it deserves. It may not be the case at all but this article appears to be nothing more than keeping a corporate entity off GA’s back for fear of reprisal over the initial review. It won’t take many instances of this type before GA’s credibility as unbiased reviewers evaporates.

    • Paul Helinski March 17, 2017, 5:30 pm

      Yea, says the guy who didn’t watch the video for more than 2 minutes before commenting, or reading the article in its entirety. Because if you did either, these comments would be impossible. Another mom’s basement ninja splainin.

      • Legacy820 March 17, 2017, 7:41 pm

        It’s indeed better to be thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt. I have spent over thirty years of my life protecting our great nation and while weapons are just part of the tools of my profession, I take serious reviews seriously. Resorting to personal attacks to defend your apologist piece is about as unprofessional as your gratuitous use of profanity.

        If you are trying to look like an ass, you did succeed on that score. Despite your schoolyard retorts, you still haven’t addressed the apparent fact that this was simply to get Remington off of your back. Don’t try to whizz down readers backs and convince them it’s rain. At least Clay is honest.

        • Brandon paul March 19, 2017, 4:38 am

          I hope this doesnt seem random and off topic but just to remind and defend the poster who stated remington puts out products with known problems/issues repeatedly with full knowledge of doing so. This is sad but i bought a .308 remington 700 tactical three weeks ago. I have wanted one for a while now. I had not had it home for a full day and the matte black crap finish on this rifle i just paid for is already rusting. I google my model and boom people have been having this issue with these rifles and remingtons lesd than acceptable black oxide finish for years . But have they done anything at all to remedy this situation? Of course not. Remington has definetly lived its life and its over now. Its sad but its true.

          • Paul Helinski March 19, 2017, 10:45 am

            It’s not random at all Brandon. When I was at Remington I actually pressed them to ask if they are applying any of the R&D testing to QC on existing products. They are not. This is the type of comment that makes comments worth having.

        • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:49 am

          Legacy280, you are totally correct.

  • Will Drider March 17, 2017, 3:27 am

    Does the RP9 Owners manual say don’t use 124grain 9mm? No.
    Is the RP9 advertised as having a ambi slide release (we assume that means on that works)? Yes, does it? No.
    Does it slide lock on last round? Intermittently.
    The mags are oversizes for cartridge length. Fine if everything stays in place. What happens when they are shifted to the front? Doesn’t mag dimensions drive grip size minimums even with inserts?
    Over-engineered? Why would a company build such a large and heavy slide (for the caliber) and do the same with a “chassis” thats not removable? Even raw metal = $. It only makes sense when using most of the same toolong to make a .45 but possibly a poor mans 10mm too.

    I’m not a MAC subscriber, but in researching firearms, I’ve veiwed a dozen or so vids of his. From your comments on his expertise, I think not. I’ve seen his reviews on guns I own or have owned and he is spot on. He brought up a problem on one of mine that I didn’t know, checked it and he was right! He reviews and tests them very thoroughly and consistently. Sadly few of your contributing authors near that level and I have addressed that several times before.

    Clay is a breath of fresh air in the stagnation of reviews here. Yes, he is rough around the edges, calls it as he sees it, makes no excuses or generalizations to fudge accolades where not deserved. To be clear Clay is to gun reviews what Trump is to politics. Don’t screw the pooch on this, let Clay do his thing.

    My last point is when you buy a gun of the shelf, you get an example of what any buyer could end up with good or bad. And good manufactures do let bad guns out, unintentionally we hope. Does anyone thinks review guns or demo guns at Shot Show, or media events were just pulled randomly off the line and sent without having been carefully checked out and tweaked? Be realistic, its business and they a damn well going to try and make it a favorable as possible, wouldn’t you. So the Factory sends MAC a second gun and you one too. Hummm. They work but still have bugs. MAC was not the only INDEPENDENT reviewer with VP9 problems there were several. Neither MAC nor Clay have the power to kill the VP9. The VP9 stands on its own pros and cons as Remington produced it. It does not matter that Remington made it to compete with the Ruger at price point. The fact is the VP9 will be compaired to a wider field. Like most handguns it is primarly for a defensive role but even at its lower pirce point its flaws make it unsuitable in a life or death scenario. Ad to that Remingtons other pistol line problems, and the bad press over the lawsuit for a bad trigger (by their own documents) they have been using for decades while paying out of Court settlements (cheaper the total replacement). Other then their shotguns, Remington has lost a lot of trust and buyer confidence. The VP9s quality and marketing are problems that sit squarely in Remingtons lap and not on the sholders of those that do a service to the gun community reviewing them.

    • Paul Helinski March 17, 2017, 5:28 pm

      Will, as usual you have proven that you are a useless fool who doesn’t even bother to read anything. There is no stagnation for people who are actually going to buy the product Will. They need comprehensive information before they spend the money that they earned, rather than the stuff they got free from the government, ahum . The 124 grain ammo that I shot worked fine, as did his second gun with everything he ran through it. And he conveniently shot up all of the reloads, so we’ll never know if they are out of true.

      • Will Drider March 18, 2017, 10:06 am

        My points are listed in the same order as you presented issues in the vid and article, obviously I used both. You on the other hand do another personal attack since you can’t debate or defend your unscrupulous hit job article/video. Just disable the comments section as you have done before. You don’t want debate, you can’t answer with a civil tongue and you don’t respond with professionalism or maturity. Respect should be given as received.

        • Chick March 20, 2017, 6:53 am

          This author needs a sit down and face to face with the print editor about his reviews and respect for others. Will, you give a valid review of the article, while the author gets a case of his panties wadded up. The original reviewer of this firearm gave his opinion of the firearm and why. It was valid. This article stinks of manufacture influence. When Dupont sold out Remington years ago, the quality of the firearms went down hill. Just like the quality of Marlin firearms went down hill, when Remington acquired them. Remington needs to step back, recognize that quality and reliability is what firearms owners want.

      • Ole cowboy March 20, 2017, 9:31 am

        Paul – As a reviewer, yours and Clays articles were appreciated with exception of the frequent unprofessional abuses of language that your mothers would have found appalling.
        During your review you spoke of Remington sending a second gun, I would be hesitant with this article and feel like ‘the manufacturer’ had tweaked and tuned it. I would rather the manufacturer send you a voucher to go to a retailer and get one off the shelf. Or since you were at the factory, take a finished product off the line, box it, and have them ship it to you untouched.
        Having done Quality Assurance and testing for over 40 years, I’ve learned that my samples MUST be randomly selected or at minimum not tampered with.
        Two major flaws with the RP9, as tested by both you and Clay were not, in my opinion, given due diligence. Number 1 is the slide release working only on one side. Your responsibility was to have specially asked and reported what Remington ‘suits’ were doing to correct and when would a recall be generated?
        Number 2 – the lateral length of magazines. You banged yours in what appears to be a long known manner (similar to M-16 twenty rounders we only put 18 back in the day). There were hints during yours and others reviews this could be a problem. If one inadequately, or did not bang at all, the wrong direction and all the cartridges slide bullet forward as you indicated there was extra room, would the RP9 still perform? Yes, in competitions one might consistently bang their mags, however, since this is a ‘lower priced – poorer man’s gun, do we all know to bang and takeout the space?
        Other than these 2 potentially unsafe or dangerous issues with the Remington RP9 less than thoroughly reviewed or investigated, and the abusive language, I enjoyed the listening to and reading your review and the replies to criticism that followed.
        Just be cautious with respect to second or replacement guns, unless it was corrected by a standard recall. Voucher for an off the shelf is the cat’s meow to the real article for freebies.
        Looking forward to what Remington ‘suits’ told you or should I be bold and say ‘showed’ you? Hope you asked specific, hard questions.
        (Another SASS shooter, thanks Pard)

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend