Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

anyone have any experience with kel tec?especially the small sub compacts.

Well I don't own one but I can link you to some excellent video reviews by nutnfancy on the P3AT and PF9:

P3AT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aroWUQuPtU

PF9 Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNRbkOdUgms

PF9 Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aLx1v2AY1M

I did a 50 round field test with the 9mm Keltec and found it to be a filthy little piece of trash that couldnt hit the target at 3 yards.

I would check out www.ktog.org for all things Kel-Tec.

This is a very good resource - the model-specific forums are very good at elaborating the positives and negatives of Kel-Tec ownership.

For instance, if you are having trouble hitting the target at 3 yards with a P-11 or PF-9, you can easily find pointers that will help you improve your consistency and accuracy with the weapon.

The sub-compacts, because of their light weight and unique design, can often be finicky to shoot and do require a proper break in period.

Hmmm. Well, I'm not sure about the rest of you, but in a life or death situation the last attribute I'd want in a firearm has got to be "finicky". Just sayin'.

I'll tell ya, I was really disappointed. The one I tested was awful. KT's are also known for not polishing the feedramp well enough and then they jam.

Fair enough, but for some people, a budget firearm like a kel-tec might be their only option.

Additionally, you can't deny their innovation in terms of reducing the size and weight of firearms for concealed carry.

If you know you were going to be in a conflict, you would obviously choose something more substantial than a kel-tec, however, that 38 oz 1911 isn't going to do you any good if you don't carry it. The size and weight of these diminutive kel-tecs ensure that any body type can carry in any situation.

ProShooter wrote:I'll tell ya, I was really disappointed. The one I tested was awful. KT's are also known for not polishing the feedramp well enough and then they jam.

That is definitely disappointing, and unfortunately kel-tec's do have that reputation for sometimes not being "good-to-go" right out of the box.

That said, with a little tinkering using KTOG as a guide, you can definitely end up with a reliable carry weapon for a budget price.

And as with any weapon, you would want to prove it's reliability yourself before depending on it.

They do offer a lifetime warranty to the original purchaser, and it is my understanding that their customer service is quite good.

ProShooter wrote:I did a 50 round field test with the 9mm Keltec and found it to be a filthy little piece of trash that couldnt hit the target at 3 yards.

Forget hitting the target, my old range buddies could get through a mag without jamming at least once.

My impression of Kel-Tec has been, QC is nonexistent. Sometimes tolerances stack up well and you get something that works, but otherwise there are better alternatives in their price range IMHO. The best thing I can say about Kel-Tec is at least it isn't a highpoint.

Check out Ruger or Taurus and you will be much happier.

Wow, no love for Kel-Tec here.

I like them because they are American owned and operated, an industry innovator, and have a lifetime warranty.

I couldn't be happier with my Sub-2000 9 MM Carbine (http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/rifles/sub-2000/).

I agree that Ruger and Taurus might have more polished products when compared to the 32 and 380 ACP offerings from Kel-Tec, however, Kel-Tec did create the original polymer gripped pocket sized pistols in these calibers, and that should count for something.

I think what we're saying is that when it comes to defending our lives or the lives of our families, quality, reliability, and dependability will trump budget, and country of manufacture. Simply put, I imagine that most of us will pick the better product.

All that said, I personally have never owned a Kel-Tec, and have no experience with them. I do like my Austrian tupperware, though.

Check out a Bersa 380 Thunder concealed carry. They are very dependable and get great reviews and the price is reasonable.

Beware of of small .380s for a CCW weapons. They are hard to shoot and have snappy recoil. That said if it's all your going to carry then it's better than nothing. I have never shot a Kel-tec. Reviews seem to be really mixed and I find that more true when the company was young. It seems their quality has gotten better with time. I would still look in to the Ruger LCP instead.

Check out a Bersa 380 Thunder concealed carry. They are very dependable and get great reviews and the price is reasonable

+1 The Bersa .380Thunder are pretty nice IMO. They are have pretty low recoil but are little large to be a .380.

FatAndy wrote:however, Kel-Tec did create the original polymer gripped pocket sized pistols in these calibers, and that should count for something.

When choosing a CC piece, what exactly does it count for?

chfaunce wrote:I think what we're saying is that when it comes to defending our lives or the lives of our families, quality, reliability, and dependability will trump budget, and country of manufacture. Simply put, I imagine that most of us will pick the better product.

All that said, I personally have never owned a Kel-Tec, and have no experience with them. I do like my Austrian tupperware, though.

+1

Also, your Austrian tupperware is vastly different IMHO than a Kel-Tec. I like my Glocks too.

gunderwood wrote:

FatAndy wrote:however, Kel-Tec did create the original polymer gripped pocket sized pistols in these calibers, and that should count for something.

When choosing a CC piece, what exactly does it count for?

Nothing. I would imagine the procedures for choosing (and trusting) a CC piece go something like this:

1) Solicit opinions from trusted people who have actually owned and used the firearm.
2) Purchase the firearm.
3) Break in the firearm according the its manufacturer's specifications.
4) Run at least two boxes of your chosen self defense ammo through the firearm. (This is very important for ALL pocket pistols, as ALL of them have been known to be finicky with ammunition - just ask the internets).
5) If the firearm satisfies your reliability requirements with a particular brand of ammo, begin to use it for CC.

What I was trying to get at (poorly) is that, since Kel-Tec was the first to market (often by several years) with this new type of polymer framed subcompact CC pistol, they are also likely to be the source of most of the criticism. It is also likely that most of the design bugs will be flushed out over time, and that the big boys can swoop in with their "competitive" versions (even though the Ruger LCP is nearly identical to the Kel Tec P3AT, and in fact, the slide assemblies can be interchanged).

And I too would probably look for some Austrian Tupperware, given the long and trusted reputation of the National Austrian Tupperware brand, if in fact they made a single stack 9MM CC pistol that was .88 inches thick and 5.85 inches in total length. Alas, they do not, and given that I am Fat Andy, there is very little room to spare in my jeans.

Anyhow, I recently purchased a Kel Tec PF-9, and if it is the unworthy POS that many of you have said it will be, I will happily stand corrected right here on this forum. Please stay tuned for my range report.

FatAndy wrote:

gunderwood wrote:

FatAndy wrote:however, Kel-Tec did create the original polymer gripped pocket sized pistols in these calibers, and that should count for something.

When choosing a CC piece, what exactly does it count for?

Nothing. I would imagine the procedures for choosing (and trusting) a CC piece go something like this:

1) Solicit opinions from trusted people who have actually owned and used the firearm.
2) Purchase the firearm.
3) Break in the firearm according the its manufacturer's specifications.
4) Run at least two boxes of your chosen self defense ammo through the firearm. (This is very important for ALL pocket pistols, as ALL of them have been known to be finicky with ammunition - just ask the internets).
5) If the firearm satisfies your reliability requirements with a particular brand of ammo, begin to use it for CC.

What I was trying to get at (poorly) is that, since Kel-Tec was the first to market (often by several years) with this new type of polymer framed subcompact CC pistol, they are also likely to be the source of most of the criticism. It is also likely that most of the design bugs will be flushed out over time, and that the big boys can swoop in with their "competitive" versions (even though the Ruger LCP is nearly identical to the Kel Tec P3AT, and in fact, the slide assemblies can be interchanged).

And I too would probably look for some Austrian Tupperware, given the long and trusted reputation of the National Austrian Tupperware brand, if in fact they made a single stack 9MM CC pistol that was .88 inches thick and 5.85 inches in total length. Alas, they do not, and given that I am Fat Andy, there is very little room to spare in my jeans.

Anyhow, I recently purchased a Kel Tec PF-9, and if it is the unworthy POS that many of you have said it will be, I will happily stand corrected right here on this forum. Please stay tuned for my range report.

Everyone has an opinion or experience. I simply gave mine (which was very bad). Specifically I said I thought their quality control was bad, not their basic design; there certainly are examples of working guns. Lower the QC on a Glock enough and it won't work either. Like the Hipoints, Kel-Tec's have a place in the market and some people love them, but I'd always recommend you spend a bit more and get something much better (IMO). It is your money, spend it how you like.

Labor intensive steps or parts are the first thing to go when you try to build a cheap gun. Forged parts are expensive, use cast or MIM. Testing everything cost lots of money. Etc. I've posted this about ARs before several times. The design is basically identical, but there certainly are people who build junk ARs. QC baby. However, that doesn't preclude getting a good gun. Glocks have the reputation they do not because one has never failed, but rather that a lemon is the statistical oddity. Kel-Tec's have a checkered reputation because their QC is hit or miss. Another great example is 1911s. Everyone makes one (same basic design), but QC varies a ton! Some 1911s jam so much you are better off throwing it than shooting it. Others function flawlessly.

How about a snubby revolver, like an LCR, S&W 642, or Taurus 650/850? Those are pretty easy to conceal, and the .38 Special round will get the job done at least as well as the .380 Auto, won't it? Plus, you can shoot through your coat pocket if you have to, without stovepiping.

I can tell you that neither the LCR nor 642 with standard .38 Spl ammo is unpleasant to practice with on a daily basis. Yes, I do believe in regular and frequent practice with your carry firearm.

CowboyT wrote:How about a snubby revolver, like an LCR, S&W 642, or Taurus 650/850? Those are pretty easy to conceal, and the .38 Special round will get the job done at least as well as the .380 Auto, won't it? Plus, you can shoot through your coat pocket if you have to, without stovepiping.

I can tell you that neither the LCR nor 642 with standard .38 Spl ammo is unpleasant to practice with on a daily basis. Yes, I do believe in regular and frequent practice with your carry firearm.

The .38Special is a better round than 380 Auto. The standard 380 load pushes a 90-95gr bullet to around 900-1000fps. The .38 can push a 110gr at least that fast. Gel tests indicate the .38 penetrates better than the 380. Not to mention you can sometimes shoot +P which is even better. FYI, I own a 380 pocket pistol and carry it.

My problem with revolver is the cylinder thickness. It isn't an issue if you carry it in a coat pocket, but pants pockets are a problem IMHO.

thanks for your replies. i also have look at the ruger lcp and the glock36,,,i think kel tec will not be a viable option,i need somthing for cc in the summer.i have heard good things about the ruger lcp, the glock 36 looks interesting.

i have both the p11 and the p3at. the P3at is great for CC. i can put it in my pants pocket with my wallet and i'll forget its there. the p11, is also a good CC, especially in winter when you have a coat to wear. the p11 isnt bad to shoot, but i HATE shooting the p3at. i'd rather shoot a 44 mag then it. it literally after abou 40 rounds makes my hand go numb. it has quite the bad muzzle flip. but i dont carry it because its a great shooter, i carry it because its the smallest gun i have.