Kel Tec P3AT vs. Ruger LCP ???

[tcencore3006]

So I am shopping for a small carry gun.  I do alot of wheeling and dealing and the idea of meeting up with a stranger to look at a gun without having a carry gun on me makes me a big nervous.  Like i said I want something.  I have look at and held both the Keltec P3AT and the Ruger LCP (both .380's).  Personally I can't see much difference.  A slight difference in price and the Ruger is more pleasing to the eye.  Apart from that, what is the difference?  Any feedback would be great.  I you have one, what are your impressions?  Have you shot one?  Anything you can add will help.

[32 Magnum]

The Ruger has a manual slide hold open feature which is lacking in the Kel-Tec.  I own a P3AT 2nd Gen (with the refined/redesigned extractor) and it is very reliable.  I've had one failure to feed in around 500 rounds - it wouldn't go up the spout without a bit of help from my thumb.  I have two friends who purchased the Ruger - both were subject to the safety recall but have been reliable since returned - although the Rugers seemed to take a bit of break-in to be fully reliable.  Internally - there's not much difference mechanically, except in the shaping of some of the parts.

[Bigeasy]

I have the LCP, and the KelTec P.32 version..  Pretty much the same gun really.  My KelTec .32 has jammed several times out of maybe 150 rounds.  The LCP none out of about the same amount of ammo.  Trigger is a little smoother on the Ruger.  Both hit pretty close to their small, hard to see sights.  I have big hands, and the KelTec seems to rap my trigger finger enough to be annoying after a while, the Ruger does not.
 
Larry

[Graybeard]

Why not get the Kel-Tec PF9 and have full 9mm firepower. The size difference is really not much. Here is a photo of my P32, P3-AT and PF-9.

[Blue Duck]

The 9mm has more power and costs about a third less to shoot then the .380 also.

[Redhawk1]

I have owned both and sold my Kal-tec. I still have my LCP.. Both shoot great, but I just liked the Ruger better.

[tcencore3006]

I have owned both and sold my Kal-tec. I still have my LCP.. Both shoot great, but I just liked the Ruger better.

What about the Ruger do you like better?

[Redhawk1]

The manual slide lock, and it is a bit slimmer, also the grip looks a little better and feels better to me.. It is not much of a difference though. I like them both, but just liked the Ruger a little more. That's it..

[MGMorden]

They're both pretty close.  Most people seem to agree that Ruger "copied" the design mostly from the Kel-tec, which I won't argue, but while I don't have much problem with either, I trust Ruger a bit more to make a working example from a design which is why I bought the LCP.  I've been through hundreds of rounds of FMJ with my LCP with no malfunctions.  Also have shot a few mags worth of Hornady Critical Defense (which is what I carry) to ensure functionality with no issues either. 


That said, I'm thinking of getting another pocket .380 just for giggles and if I do I'd definitely consider the Kel-tec (the Taurus and Hellcat are also possibilities - wouldn't buy another LCP but that's just because it's just not in my nature to buy a 2nd instance of a gun I already own).

[GH1]

I own a K-T and have shot the Ruger. I thought the Ruger was a little more controllable, although since I put the Mag extension on the K-T it's about the same. What I really like about the ruger is the fact that you can lock the slide open, and the K-T you can't.
Still, the K-T is a reliable performer and one of the originals in the genre. I believe many have copied the K-T.
GH1

[tcencore3006]

I have made my decision.  I shall be buying the Ruger as soon as my finances allow (I tied up alot of money in another ar build).  To answer the question, why a .380 and not the 9mm: I would have to say that I want something I can just throw in my pocket.  I don't want a full-size.  I mean don't get me wrong. I do want one but not for the application I am looking to use it for.  Thanks for your input guys.