Author Topic: Compact 9 mm's (Read 22392 times)

WD45 · « **Reply #60 on:** September 11, 2012, 04:34:57 AM »

well boys, I've joined the tupperware party

bought one of them ruger LC9's. What do you lube these things with, chicken soup??

Swampman · « **Reply #61 on:** September 11, 2012, 04:40:09 AM »

I use Break-Free CLP.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #62 on:** September 11, 2012, 05:12:37 AM »

I too use Breakfree CLP which now is under the Winchester brand. They also make a Breakfree CLP for synthetic cleaning so it doesn't damage any synthetic plastics.

Savage · « **Reply #63 on:** September 11, 2012, 10:29:26 AM »

I have two P-11s, one P32 (Had two, but let a friend talk me out of one), two P3ATs, and one PF9. The only one I've had a problem with was the first P3AT. It suffered from a walking assembly pin, and destroyed the aluminum frame in a 50rd BUG qualification. KT fixed it for me, and hard chromed the slide for my trouble. I still carry one of the P3ATs frequently if I'm not carrying the PF9, which is by far my favorite. For pocket guns, I use a dry lube from Brownells, called "Action Magic". Oil and grease collect too much foreign matter. If I were going to shoot them more than a couple mags at a time, I'd lube them with a light synthetic grease. For a light easy to carry 9mm compact, the PF9 is by far my favorite. I would recommend it to anyone wanting a compact 9. For that matter, I'd recommend any of the other Kel Tecs I've owned based on my experience with them. Lots of good choices our there now. Most gun manufacturers make a mini .380 and a compact 9 these days..
Savage

Spirithawk · « **Reply #64 on:** September 11, 2012, 11:05:59 AM »

Yep, Kel Tec has just great ideas everyone else can't wait to copy them. Proof they must be doing something right.

I'm like you Savage, my PF-9 is by far my favorite handgun for Conceal Carry. Wouldn't think of selling it nor trading. I never leave home without it and even at home it's always within reach.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #65 on:** September 11, 2012, 01:35:41 PM »

I wish you fellers wouldn't shoot them nasty Kel-Tecs. I worry about you. They ain't real guns, you know. And what if somebody you know actuallys saw you with one of 'em? It would be like gettin' caught wearing ladies underwear. I mean once people even hear a rumor that you've got a Kel-Tec, you can't ever live it down. It brands you forever.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #66 on:** September 11, 2012, 01:52:11 PM »

An excerpt from the Truth About Guns regarding the PF9.

[font=]Glocks, Springfields, Smiths and other fine, higher end guns will shoot out of the box. Not this one. It would pay you to take a dremel and smooooooooth out the rails, ramp, and any burrs you may find along the way. Give yourself this edge as the manufacturer does not. I didn’t clean my PF9 when new. I put four boxes through the gun and had to stop halfway through due to a 50 percent FTF/FTE rate. Rougher finish than what I had anticipated. [/font][font=]The PF9′s fit and finish could be a little better; I would cheerfully pay the 30 bucks more if Kel-Tec would just do it.[/font]

[font=]The grip is awfully sharp without a mod. [/font][font=]I had trouble hitting the PF9′s release when practicing. Due to the sizeable recoil, it caused me to eject mags before their time. Premature ejection, if you will . . .[/font]

[font=]Trigger: [/font][font=]The PF9′s trigger is not great. It’s steady but the takeup is too long. If Kel-Tec made this simple improvement they’d make the PF9 a whole ‘nuther wonder.[/font]

[font=]Ammo: [/font][font=]I would NOT suggest Plus P’s. Keep it to simple HP’s of the 115 to 124 gr and no more.[/font]

[font=]Accuracy: [/font][font=]Slow, long pull, do not lend well to double-taps (read: S&W Sigmas). Both the Kel-Tec PF9 and Sigmas are excellent value guns but they do have their limitations. I know how to improve the Sigmas trigger but, the Kel-Tec? Not sure you can. Anyway, slow, you should ne fine with deliberate firing on a sitting duck (i.e. any range target) out to about 15 yards. That’s a tad under 50 feet folks. After that, you may have problems both legally and morally. The PF9′s a parking lot gun.[/font]

Swampman · « **Reply #67 on:** September 11, 2012, 02:38:40 PM »

Life is to valuable to trust the cheapest pistol you can buy.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #68 on:** September 11, 2012, 03:15:16 PM »

I have a question about the short barreled 9mm.
When I shoot my 38 revolvers at steel the 6" and 4" barrles easily swing the steel targets.
When I shoot the 2" 38 with the same ammo it does not always swing the steel.
I was given the suggestion to shoot heavier ammo for the 2" to make the steel swing.But the heavier bullets increase recoil with the little revolver.
I wonder if the same is true about the shorter 9mm barrels.
I also wonder if a gun the size of a 380 may not be better shooting 380 ammo.
When you look at a 9mm most barrels are 4.5 to 5 inches in a duty gun and the powders are made to burn in that time span.
A 380 is 2.75 to 4 inches and the ammo designers make the powder burn up totaly in that span reaching max velocity.
I would love to see a comparason between a same size 380, a 9mm and a full size 9mm and see what the speeds are and what they do to a steel target and Jello.

Spirithawk · « **Reply #69 on:** September 11, 2012, 03:26:14 PM »

Some people just love to trash Kel Tec. Fact is they are one of the most copied companies out there these days. Hmmmmmm, now why might that be? I've had my PF-9 and P-32 for 3 + years and have never done anything but keep them clean and lubricated. Same as I do with all my guns. I've quit counting how many rounds I've fired through them but it's a bunch and I've never had an issue of any kind. No, they aren't designed for continuous use with + P loads but guess what? Neither are a lot of guns so your point is? Folks just love to compare them to way more expensive guns. Makes them feel superior some how I guess. The Kel Tecs are made for a specific reason and that being conceal carry. No they aren't target pistols, they never claimed to be, but they are more accurate than many who have jumped on the wagon and copied them! Just how far away do you figure most muggers stand when robbing you anyway? If you can't hit someone at those ranges you have no buiseness even shooting a gun and acuracy sure isn't coming in to play! Kel Tecs were designed to do a job and they do it very well and that just eats at some who think no gun is worth owning unless it costs you a months pay! Name any gun, regardless of make or cost, and I'll wager I can find a few that love nothing better than to trash it. Doesn't make it a bad gun though. For all the trash talk about Kel Tecs isn't it strange that the majority of us who own them love them! Here's a news flash for ya. As long as a person is happy and satisfied with their choices of firearms your trash talk doesn't amount to much.

WD45 · « **Reply #70 on:** September 12, 2012, 05:21:51 AM »

Put 200 rounds through it. The only issue is the rear pin wants to walk out a bit. Will have to put a dab of loc tite on it. I like shooting the little thing. I have also used breakfree CLP for a long time or ballistol.

Swampman · « **Reply #71 on:** September 12, 2012, 08:58:19 AM »

Quote from: drdougrx on August 06, 2012, 07:00:31 AM

"and hopefully you will never have to use your pistol for anything but "fun"."

Amen Rev.

esp. if it's a Taurus or a Kel-Tec

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #72 on:** September 12, 2012, 10:28:25 AM »

Hey, I was just reporting what the article said. But you do have a point. I sort of do enjoy making fun of Kel-Tecs because they are so absolutely easy to make fun of.
I don't understand the notion that if a gun is copied, that the copy (in this case a Ruger) must be worse than the original. Ruger must be worse than Kel-Tec, if Kel-Tec came up with the idea for a 9mm that size. That makes no sense. If Ruger copied a Charter Arms, I'd much rather have the Ruger. Actually, if Charter Arms copied a Kel-Tec, I'd take the Charter.
Oh, shucks. I might as well just say it. I'd rather carry a rotten stick than a Kel-Tec. I don't know why a person would buy one. For a little more, he could have a Ruger. Do you honestly mean to say you'd rather have a Kel-Tec than a Ruger?

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #73 on:** September 12, 2012, 10:34:30 AM »

Hey, I was just stating what the article stated. Based on those truths, I'd not take one to a dog fight.

Savage · « **Reply #74 on:** September 12, 2012, 11:52:01 AM »

My kel tecs came long before Ruger considered entering into the compact pistol market. I don't know if the Rugers are better or worse than the Kel Tecs. Time will tell. Ruger certainly has the resources to make a quality product, and the Rugers I own are good quality firearms. Neither one will necessarily inspire pride of ownership. What I have works, so as long as that's the case I'll keep my kel tecs. Any of the mini pistols are guns you carry when you're pretty sure you won't need a gun. For serious carry, I'll have a Glock on my side, and maybe a Kel Tec in my pocket.
I'll add that my PF9 more than holds it's own in club BUG matches with pistols that cost three times as much. Good enough for this old warhorse.
Savage

Spirithawk · « **Reply #75 on:** September 12, 2012, 05:43:09 PM »

Do I mean to say I'd choose Kel Tec over Ruger? In the case of small 9's and .380's you know it! Rather evident by what I carry so why even ask? As for the Ruger copies of Kel Tec you convieniently fail to mention they've had more than their fair share of problems themselves and Ruger is not near as quick to fix them either! In my book yeah that makes Kel Tec better! That's not from stats found on line that comes from those I know who have owned both. I concider a company that developes it's own ideas and who bends over backwards to correct any mistakes preferable to companies that quickly jump on the wagon making copies just for the sake of quick profits and who seem not to care once they have your money. My Kel Tecs have been 100% reliable, yeah right out of the box and over a long period of use in all kinds of conditions using various brands of ammo. How many guns can claim that, including way more expensive ones? Most of what you quote was on first generation models and when noted was quickly and decisively corrected. As to the trigger pull I know more who like it than don't and it's a matter of personal opinion and guess what? Ruger has the same trigger pull, which you also failed to mention. You base your facts on out dated info and personal opinion and expect us to buy it? Frankly I'd rather buy a Kel Tec! I agree with Savage, rant away but I'll keep mine. Funny too, you choose to believe an outdated article over those who actualy own said firearm. That in itself says a lot, about your agenda, not the gun.

Bigeasy · « **Reply #76 on:** September 12, 2012, 08:46:43 PM »

RE the Kel tek / Ruger debate..

I purchased a Kel Tek P32 when they first came out, as a deep concealment weapon. Picked up a case of 500 S&B fmj rounds as well. Put all 500 rounds thru that gun the first year I had it, with only a couple FTF in the first few magazine loads. Has proven to be 100% reliable, including the use of various HP ammo. My only complaint is the sharp checkering on the grip - a little to abrasive.

Picked up a Ruger LCP about a year after intro, mainly for the more powerful caliber. The Ruger has proven to also be 100% with about 350 or rounds of assorted ammo thru it.

Quality of manufacture seems about the same for both, as does trigger pull. Sights on both are poor - but fine for the close range use they are designed for. Either gun will keep them all on a paper plate at 25 yards if your technique is good.

As far as compact 9mm's go, I have owned and carried a Glock 26 since they about first came out. Not as small (thin) as some of the newer designs that have come out, but 100% reliability thru thousands of rounds, good feeling grip, very good combat trigger, and enough accuracy to be competitive with most full size guns.... Whats not to like??

Larry

Savage · « **Reply #77 on:** September 13, 2012, 01:15:13 AM »

Guys, the beauty part of not being married to one platform or manufacturer, is the freedom to experience and enjoy them all. Like others, I have my preferences, which are subject to change as new products/information become available. I don't look at anything material as an extension of my character. For 35 yrs my preference was the 1911 platform in pistols. The S&W in revolvers, and the Ruger in rim fire pistols. Currently I'm in a Glock phase. Who knows, next year or next month, I may be back to the CZ, or Kimber, maybe even Sig or Smith. I don't suffer anything that doesn't work properly. Anything that doesn't do the job, goes down the road. Carry guns are a tool, if they work as they should, it makes no difference what you paid for it, or the name on the slide.
Savage

Spirithawk · « **Reply #78 on:** September 13, 2012, 04:01:48 AM »

Quote from: Savage on September 13, 2012, 01:15:13 AM

Guys, the beauty part of not being married to one platform or manufacturer, is the freedom to experience and enjoy them all. Like others, I have my preferences, which are subject to change as new products/information become available. I don't look at anything material as an extension of my character. For 35 yrs my preference was the 1911 platform in pistols. The S&W in revolvers, and the Ruger in rim fire pistols. Currently I'm in a Glock phase. Who knows, next year or next month, I may be back to the CZ, or Kimber, maybe even Sig or Smith. I don't suffer anything that doesn't work properly. Anything that doesn't do the job, goes down the road. Carry guns are a tool, if they work as they should, it makes no difference what you paid for it, or the name on the slide.
Savage

Well said.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #79 on:** September 13, 2012, 04:41:20 AM »

Wow. That's a bit rough. I don't have an agenda, at least I hope I don't. I merely expressed an opinion and shared some facts. I realize my opinions are rather firm, but they are about the gun, not the person. Whomever favors Kel-Tecs should buy and use them and carry them; I'm just saying I wouldn't do it and don't see why a person would. That is not a personal attack, and again, I have no agenda.
Also, I meant no offense. I hope I've made no enemies here. That's a weak apology, I know, so here's a stronger one. I'm very sorry for the offense I caused.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #80 on:** September 13, 2012, 04:54:29 AM »

The Kel tech, Ruger, Glock and other small polymeyer framed guns is the same argument that has been going on for hundreds of years.
S&W VS Colt VS Remington in the 1873 ctg single action revolver
Revolver Vs Auto loader of the 50's
Aluminium Vs Steel of the 50's
The Stainless stell of the 60's
The Polymer of the 90's Vs aluminuim Vs steel Vs Stainless
and let's not forget the Ford, Dodge, Chevy, and forgien cars debates that have been going on since the 40's.
I think if you pick a gun that fits you, that you are comfortable with, that you are convinced is reliable is what is going to matter in carrying a gun. If you are convinced that the round will be effective, it shoots where you aim and is relaible in your hands then carry it.
And no matter what you think some one will always tell you that his Chevy/ Ford/ Dodge/ handgun / Caliber is better. and it does exactly the same thing as the one you have, just a differnet name, material, design, or other.

keith44 · « **Reply #81 on:** September 13, 2012, 05:09:28 AM »

Quote from: mcwoodduck on September 13, 2012, 04:54:29 AM

The Kel tech, Ruger, Glock and other small polymeyer framed guns is the same argument that has been going on for hundreds of years.
S&W VS Colt VS Remington in the 1873 ctg single action revolver
Revolver Vs Auto loader of the 50's
Aluminium Vs Steel of the 50's
The Stainless stell of the 60's
The Polymer of the 90's Vs aluminuim Vs steel Vs Stainless
and let's not forget the Ford, Dodge, Chevy, and forgien cars debates that have been going on since the 40's.
I think if you pick a gun that fits you, that you are comfortable with, that you are convinced is reliable is what is going to matter in carrying a gun. If you are convinced that the round will be effective, it shoots where you aim and is relaible in your hands then carry it.
And no matter what you think some one will always tell you that his Chevy/ Ford/ Dodge/ handgun / Caliber is better. and it does exactly the same thing as the one you have, just a differnet name, material, design, or other.

Ya beat me to it

The one point I would argue, though is in the level of accuracy potential. Just because it is designed for point of contact ranges does not mean it should not be accurate to 25 yards or beyond. In my OPINION a handgun should be accurate enough to be fun to shoot at the range, not just defensive drills but small targets as well. My NAA mini revolver will hit drink cans laid on end 4 out of 5 shots at 20 yards. Makes it fun, and encourages more shooting.

Spirithawk · « **Reply #82 on:** September 13, 2012, 06:09:01 AM »

Mike, were you not quoting out dated info your "facts" might be valid. But since you are they are not. How hard is that to understand? Why is it hard to understand that one would prefer an original, with all the bugs worked out, than a copy where the company relies on it's name for sales and doesn't seem to care if the bugs in their copy are corrected? Not picking on you but did you ever concider that you can't understand why someone would buy a Kel Tec has little to do with the company and products and everything to do with predjudice against both? Your sticking to out dated info you've read as oposed to current info from actual owners is the reason I ask. Kel Tec easy to make fun of? Hmmm lets see? So is Colt, Remington, Kimber, Ruger, Taurus, ect.,ect., ect! As you say, it's so easy, after all one just has to want to trash something to do so.

As to the PF-9 being accurate? I know several folks, myself included, that can put every shot inside a paper plate at 40 yards. Maybe not to some folk but that seems pretty dang accurate to me for a handgun with such a short barrel as the PF-9! Know many others in it's class that can do that? Not saying there isn't but I'm betting not many and the few that can I'm betting will cost conciderably more.

Swampman · « **Reply #83 on:** September 13, 2012, 07:54:43 AM »

If anyone is copying Keltec I hope they are using quality materials. I'm unaware on anyone copying Keltec.

williamlayton · « **Reply #84 on:** September 13, 2012, 08:11:42 AM »

I have platforms I like and those that I do not care for.
I don't care for Glocks because of the way it fits my hand---most uncomfortable.
I can't say anything bad about Kel-tec---or---anything good.
I absolutely detest small handguns and snubbies---have no use for them and I own one.
I really like fast bullets---I really like fat bullets for carrying.
I carry fast bullets sometimes.
I don't like revolvers for carry--but I carry revolvers.
Did I mention That I do not like Glocks or their platform and won't own one?
Blessings

Spirithawk · « **Reply #85 on:** September 13, 2012, 08:38:23 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on September 13, 2012, 07:54:43 AM

If anyone is copying Keltec I hope they are using quality materials. I'm unaware on anyone copying Keltec.

Me too Swamp. Then maybe they will be as reliable as Kel Tecs have proven to be. As to copying? Realy? You who always seem so well informed are not aware of copies though they now seem to be everywhere? Lets see, Kel Tec comes out with a subcompact .32 and .380. They were wise enough to see a need and fill that need and sales take off. Suddenly Ruger, Taurus, Diamond and a number of others come out with .32's and .380s. Many almost exact copies of Kel Tecs designs. Some so close you have to pick them up and get a close look to tell them apart! Kel Tec comes out with the PF-9. Guess what? Ruger suddenly decides hey those are realy selling and comes out with the LC9. So do several others suddenly jump on the wagon and start making compact 9s that closely resemble Kel Tecs. It's pretty much common knowledge that Kel Tec has widely been copied? I've even heard many, who aren't particularly Kel Tec fans, admit they are heavily copied. Gee Swamp, been doing selective reading have ya?

William, at least you sir are honest and making no excuses using out dated info nor trashing something simply for the fun of doing so or because you've nothing better to do. Nor dwelling on problems that have been addressed and fixed making your argument pointless.

Savage · « **Reply #86 on:** September 13, 2012, 10:41:14 AM »

Not a 9mm subcompact, but kinda the forerunner:
The first subcompact .32 that I was aware of was the Seecamp. I might have never owned a Kel Tec if I could have found a Seecamp for sale back in the day. In the early 80s the Seecamps were going for close to a grand. Even then, you could rarely find one. I wanted one bad for a backup. Along came the P32 and everyone forgot about the Seecamp. Guess they still make them?
Savage

Swampman · « **Reply #87 on:** September 13, 2012, 11:49:39 AM »

So every semiauto pistol is a copy of the Keltec....who knew? Seen to many bad reports on them to trust the cheapest pistol you can buy with my life.

Spirithawk · « **Reply #88 on:** September 13, 2012, 12:24:31 PM »

Quote from: Swampman on September 13, 2012, 11:49:39 AM

So every semiauto pistol is a copy of the Keltec....who knew? Seen to many bad reports on them to trust the cheapest pistol you can buy with my life.

Gee Swamp, what do you carry? Wanna bet that whatever it is with the click of a mouse I can find bad reports and more than a few? Still you carry it though huh? Personal experience over ride bad reports just for your choices only? Never said every semi auto was a copy but when one obviously is then it is. If you base a guns worth on reports largely proven to be based on poor care and bad ammo then why not trash all guns? Savage is right, Kel tec wasn't the first but they were the first to make them affordable and their designs are their own. Seecamp was one of the very few before Kel Tec and the two only resemble each other in size. Yes Kel Tec had a few problems early on. They were quick to fix them so get over it!

Swampman · « **Reply #89 on:** September 13, 2012, 12:40:37 PM »

I haven't read any reports of LC9s blowing up.