Why I slam Kel-Tec

[coosbaycreep]

There's a lot of people who badmouth kahrs, and there's less of them being carried too. They also cost a lot more than a keltec as well.

Any handgun is a compromise of something; firepower, capacity, reliability, weight, etc. I'm certainly not impressed with the stopping power of .32acp, but the gun has given me no reasons to doubt it's reliability, and the gun is as big and heavy as I'm willing to carry. I had a PF9 and a 442, and got rid of them because they were still just more than I wanted to pack around.

Unless you're walking around with an AK pistol tucked in your drawers, you're compromising something.

I don't know if there's any accurate stats out there, but I'd be willing to bet that KT is probably the most carried gun for CC now, and if they were all crap, they'd be out of business by now, instead of continuing to sell lots of guns and come out with innovative products.

 

[deen_ad]

Well I hope my LCP copycat lasts longer then that. I've had no issues with it thus far however I would argue that it is not a copycat exactly. I feel Ruger made some good changes to the gun and likely have a far better manufacturing process. The Ruger LCP is definately finished a lot better FWIW. Anybody have any horror stories like PBP above of an LCP self destructing?

the P-3AT is a copy of the LCP? The LCP came out far later than the P-3AT so if anything the LCP is a copycat of the P-3AT. I don't even remember how long I've had my P-3AT. I did sell the P-32 to get the P-3AT some time back.

 

[deen_ad]

I had one of the early P3AT guns that came out. It carried nice but I couldn't keep the thing. It jammed way too much and was hard to hold on to. Mine never broke but it did seem sort of frail. After several years of not trusting it I sold it.

you should fire my P-40 with either the .40 or .357 SIG barrel in it. And yes, it's reliable even with full power commercial loads. I would expect trouble with hand loads, but then someone posted the KB pictures of others pistols too!
I carry the P-3AT with Crimson Trace in my bathrobe, hopefully that'll be enough to get to the .45 or shotgun!

 

[chris61182]

My posts are only based on the .32/.380, I know nothing of the 9mm KT.

If your decision/criteria is based on cheap/little/light (jury seems out on "reliable") you probably cant beat one, its the gun for you!

I think part of the rub here is not if you could find a cheaper/lighter/smaller handgun... its..WHY?

If fighting for your life (with a paltry handgun) the question remains... would you like a SMALLER handgun or a BIGGER one?

Because having any gun, even a small one, is better than no gun? Not everyone can carry a full size pistol everywhere.

 

[cyclesarge]

Why aren't we talking about Kel-Tec kabooms on a Kel-tec thread?

I could go on...:
XD:

That actually appears to be a Beretta.

 

[cyclesarge]

How come none of the other "quality" manufacturers couldn't make a gun as light and concealable until keltec did? Until ruger ripped off KT, you either had to settle for something with a steel frame that weighed almost twice as much, or carry something far less useful like a derringer or mini revolver. S&W J-frames are more reliable, but also far heavier than a KT32 or 380, and cost a lot more too. Kahr, seecamp, and all the rest of the other guns are either heavier, bigger, or more expensive than keltec. The company has did more for conceal carry than pretty much any other company. They're a niche manufacturer for sure, but their guns fill the niche well I think.

Probably because they didn't think gun buyers would be willing to live with a product on the edge of reliability in exchange for a low cost or weight. You REALLY can't get the best of everything in one package, anyone that believes they can is lying to themselves. I have noticed a LOT of American consumers are falling for the "you can get the best of everything" concept more and more. It can be seen in the rising sales in Korean built cars, "off brand" electronics, etc. In the end it comes down to "you get what you pay for". For me, I am willing to trade having a little more weight and size and spend a little more money, for not having to worry about the reliability of the lighter cheaper gun. But then again I'd rather buy a Ford or Chevy than a Hyundai and a "back-up" Kia. I COULD understand buying a KelTec if that is all you can afford, but I know that most people on this forum have more than one gun and therefor COULD afford something better engineered, so then it comes down to size and weight issues.

 

[subman681]

There seem to be way to many issues here, but it seems to boil down to "what you feel comfortable with carrying". I think we can all agree that the Kel-Tec P-3AT is an inexpensive firearm. When I was out looking for a CC this time, I'd narrowed it down to either the Kel-Tec or the Ruger. I read and re-read all the good, bad, and maybe articles regarding both contenders. I ended up purchasing the Ruger LCP over the Kel-Tec P-3AT, even though I knew I was going to break the bank (been out of work for a year plus and am now on SS) on whatever purchase I made. The Kel-Tec was chaeper than the Ruger, but the deciding factor was "form and fit".
Please don't get me wrong, I'm really not a lover of either one (and the cost of the .380 round is increadibly expensive considering when I shot 9mm stuff). I'd really rather have my Glock 17 back in my stable, but it fell to hard times. You see, even though I'd rather be carrying the Glock I use to have, I felt I was better off carrying something over nothing at all. This I believe is the true issue. Not whether "my gun is bigger than your gun" or "my brand hasn't broken [yet] over that brand that has", but rather what you "feel" comfortable carrying.