M-851 Remington + Pic Added

I just started this thread to see if anyone had any factual info on this drawing and the 851 moniker. In lieu of actual knowledge I'm interested in educated guesses. But it seems like a few replies are from those who view their guesses as cold hard facts. Guesses are fine, just say so, no need to embellish. The only documents or links posted have been by me, but feel free to provide your own supporting documentation.

Participating in this thread is voluntary, no need for egos, we're all good here.
 
Lodi said:
I just started this thread to see if anyone had any factual info on this drawing and the 851 moniker. In lieu of actual knowledge I'm interested in educated guesses. But it seems like a few replies are from those who view their guesses as cold hard facts. Guesses are fine, just say so, no need to embellish. The only documents or links posted have been by me, but feel free to provide your own supporting documentation.

Participating in this thread is voluntary, no need for egos, we're all good here.
Click to expand...

All you have done so far is piss off those with the old remington knowledge we have here that were trying to help with an old useless drawing of no value that unless you worked for remington back in the day no one would have any knowledge or experience of why it is like it is
Not a tool a gun shop or remington dealer used only the assembly line and if there was a guy like that here he would be in his 80's if still alive an american and not on a computer I bet

Sorry you did my like my answer to your PM you sent but as you said yes you were pulling my chain . There are no egos here in this case and in my comments only knowledge from being around hand made drawings in that time frame and 55 years of working on remingtons plus a dad with a gun shop in those years and if our guesses as you call them are not correct PROVE it

Like I said call remington or did you already and they laughed

You got all of the educated guesses I would say here already and when they don't say what you want them to say we get this kind of post from you
How about wow remington started the 870 as a 851 first and you have a drawing to prove it worth a fortune . Better
You keep mentioning the 1148 and linked to it no one cares about them either any more other than maybe 4 guys here just like your drawing

Man I wish my life was this simple to waste such time and for what??
I would toss it on like you did get the feedback and say thank you. It is not worth any more than that
Rant over and to each their own
Cheers
 
Last edited:
3macs1 said:
All you have done so far is piss off those with the old remington knowledge...
Click to expand...

Wow, I didn't realize my replies affected so many of you in this manner. Apologies to all and best wishes for a happier day.

3macs1 said:
Sorry you did my like my answer to your PM you sent but as you said yes you were pulling my chain .
Click to expand...

Well, since you brought up PM's, let's look at them. No need to feel sorry for my liking your answer, I thought it was a perfectly lovely answer.

From Lodi:
"Hey 3macs1,

I'm not trying to yank your chain on the 851 thread. I ended up with some documents where the only think that stood out odd was the designation 851 in the Model box. Like a bunch of the guys I spent several decades an the bench and have never come across this designation.

I can make an educated guess about as well as the next guy, but I was hoping that someone might have actual knowledge and if not than an educated guess that could go into the hat with all the other guesses.

Thanks for the input, Lodi"

Reply from 3macs1:

~~~ Removed due to lack of permission, which is a forum violation--Lodi

Reply from 3macs1:

~~~ Removed due to lack of permission, which is a forum violation--Lodi

From Lodi:
"I grew up in duck country, 30 years on the bench, so yeah I've been in a lot of Remingtons. But working in the field does not mean inside knowledge of what was going on at the factory. My early armorer's manual is before the 11-48 line and my later manual is an 80's or so version, i don't know what's in between. The older stuff seems to have more real info than the newer stuff. Always looking for more data and was hoping someone had info they were willing to pass on."

~~ End of PM's ~~
 
Last edited:
Posting pm's or select segments what's next
Just shows 100% what you are all about
Ever read this in the rules here did I give you permission NOPE me I would be deleting them

I quote

14. Private messages should not be posted in the public forums, and copied to a 3rd party by any means, unless they are explicitly authorized by the orignators.




Who are you trying to impress. Sure won't be anyone here. Most of us shotguns guys that post here have shared info and knowledge here for years and have the utmost respect for each other and our experiences/ comments in fact every single one that has posted so far I would have in that group

You come across as just a want to be with your 30 years on the bench so you say .Sure don't remember your handle helping too many here if at all especially with vintage remingtons and just want someone to agree with your thinking

Christ you never even made our last 1148 conversation with all that knowledge and info you have on hand about them you say


get a life . enough said
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/2213696-Paging-the-Remington-11-48-experts
 
Last edited:
Lodi said:
Yeah, I've been around a lot of the old stuff but never heard of this model. I can't even find a reference in the usual sources. The other tools listed are for various models in about the same age group. These copies seem to be 'Xerox' copies, which dates it again.
Click to expand...

What are you trying to make of the drawing? What is the information you are hoping to obtain?
No dog in the fight. Just curious.
R.
 
Please stop. I have given you opportunity to legitimately bow of this conversation with both grace and honor, yet you keep coming back to double down.

Since my posting of your PM's is unauthorized I will remove them. My sincerest apology.

3macs1 said:
Christ you never even made our last 1148 conversation with all that knowledge and info you have on hand about them you say
Click to expand...

I intentionally didn't reply to your 11-48 request, but since you have made a second request I will oblige. While those with old Remington knowledge will know this I will recap.

In Post #1 of this thread I said "I have never heard of this model, though the dates kinda coincide with the 48 Mohawk and 11-48's. I'm guessing there was a change in the model designation, but the 851 was kept in the 1961 redraw."

The date on the drawing is drawing is 1949, with a redraw in 1961. The drawing also indicates use for 16ga and 20ga with additional use for 12ga, all meaning shotgun. By 1949 Remington had already discontinued the Models 10, 17 and 29 while the Model 31's are being phased out. With the end of WWII Remington is discontinuing the Model 11 and Sportsman line and Browning is starting back into production in Europe, this roughly occurred in 1948-49. Coming online are the shotgun lines of Models 11-48, 48 Mohawk and 870. The Models 58 and 1100 are still in the future.

This is why I mentioned the 11-48, it's just a guess and something to think about. With the redraw in 1961 another guess is that the tool was still in use, the only shotguns in mass production is the 11-48, while the 870 is arriving 1950, so it too could make use of the tool.

So that's why I brought up the 11-48.
 
Lodi said:
Please stop. I have given you opportunity to legitimately bow of this conversation with both grace and honor, yet you keep coming back to double down.

Since my posting of your PM's is unauthorized I will remove them. My sincerest apology.



Thank you Grace and Honor ???
wmbS5Mz.gif


There is nothing left to think about here and don't worry me and others that know remingtons are done last note ever hear of a model 31 before the 870 made until the end of 49 and early 50 . I have four of those and bet the tool was used on those
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Rman said:
What are you trying to make of the drawing? What is the information you are hoping to obtain?
No dog in the fight. Just curious.
R.
Click to expand...

Under 'Model' is the listing 851. There has never been a Model 851 produced. I have numerous drawings and in the 'Model' spot are model numbers that we are all familiar with. The drawings are old, the tools are commonplace today, but the only thing that seems out of place is the 851.

I just wanted to see if anyone had insight into this designation. Factories will many times have experimental and prototype models, some make it to production while some don't. Hey, maybe there really was a Model 851 on the drawing board.
 
Rman said:
Could you identify what some of the abbreviations mean in order to help out the OP? AS&Y, AT, A-T-S, TS, and APP
R.
Click to expand...

The two lines should be read as one 'Adjust Carrier Latch AT ASS'Y' , meaning assembly. A-T-S might be an in house filing system (Armorer's Tool Specification?) TS is probably 'Tool Steel' and APP is possibly 'Approximate'.
 
Lodi said:
Under 'Model' is the listing 851. There has never been a Model 851 produced. I have numerous drawings and in the 'Model' spot are model numbers that we are all familiar with. The drawings are old, the tools are commonplace today, but the only thing that seems out of place is the 851.

I just wanted to see if anyone had insight into this designation. Factories will many times have experimental and prototype models, some make it to production while some don't. Hey, maybe there really was a Model 851 on the drawing board.
Click to expand...

Ok. That makes sense. A couple of things tho. Any experimental model would be designated with an X, or some other in house designation. This means that the "851" would have already been in production. The problem becomes, when looking at drawings like this, is that a lot of manufacturers with long term employees had their own "in house" designations, and rules. It wouldn't be unusual for a tool (and it is a tool) that would be this widely used to have its own model number, although assembly tools are most often identified by part numbers, which this one had as well.
R.
 
3macs1 said:
... ever hear of a model 31 before the 870 made until the end of 49 and early 50 . I have four of those and bet the tool was used on those
Click to expand...

Why yes, that is why I included them in my reply. As you have four of them I'm sure you can confirm what a wonderful shotgun they are.
 
Rman said:
Ok. That makes sense. A couple of things tho. Any experimental model would be designated with an X, or some other in house designation. This means that the "851" would have already been in production. The problem becomes, when looking at drawings like this, is that a lot of manufacturers with long term employees had their own "in house" designations, and rules. It wouldn't be unusual for a tool (and it is a tool) that would be this widely used to have its own model number, although assembly tools are most often identified by part numbers, which this one had as well.
R.
Click to expand...

Agreed on the 'X' for experimental, that is what I am familiar with. While it's common I don't know if it's a rule.

Many of the drawings continue to use the same model number while having different part numbers, and those with the same model number are for that model of firearm.
 
0faustus0 said:
3macs1, let go of the bone ......... pleaaaaase ..... !!!

Sometimes, you have to know when to stop posting in a thread .....
Click to expand...

Not when there is still a bit of meat on it LOL What have I said to you before ?? You are not being forced to read here. Glad to see you still have fingers :) No TSS shot yet ???
No worries I am done with this foolishness and one would have had to be a worker at the remington factory making, designing or drawing shotguns& related items during those times to know the true answer BUT
Carry on

Take care
 
Last edited:
Lodi said:
Agreed on the 'X' for experimental, that is what I am familiar with. While it's common I don't know if it's a rule.

Many of the drawings continue to use the same model number while having different part numbers, and those with the same model number are for that model of firearm.
Click to expand...

It is a rule, but again, may not be a Remington rule.
"Many of the drawings continue to use the same model number while having different part numbers, and those with the same model number are for that model of firearm."
Yes. That is how it works. The models (complete assemblies) are made up of part numbers (individual parts).
3macs1 is correct. Without being the guy that drew it, it really is impossible to tell.
Collective experience would tell us that the 851 model number is for that particular assembly tool?
R.
 
Rman said:
Collective experience would tell us that the 851 model number is for that particular assembly tool?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I'm more used to model numbers being a bit more definitive, while part numbers appear differently they are using the same model number on different tools. Having a model number for a particular tool would require a separate way to further identify which tool it is, which might be their system. It may be just a small sequence of their alpha numeric system of cataloging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom