kel tec pf9 vs 642


September 7, 2008, 08:15 AM
I went back to snubs a couple of years ago with a S&W 642. Been thinking of trying the Kel tec PF9 for concealed carry. This will allow me to buy just one type of ammo since my other personnel owned weapon is a 92 FS. Also a few more rounds since i normally don't carry re-loads off duty, Any thoughts on this? I read when the PF 9 first came out they were having problems with them have that been fixed?

Be safe

If you enjoyed reading about "kel tec pf9 vs 642" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
September 7, 2008, 08:38 AM
stay with the 642, not only totally dependable and reliable but one super like pocket rocket.

September 7, 2008, 10:21 AM
The PF9 is a nice little gun. I carried one for a year or so. I then bought a S&W 1911PD commander size, had it bobtailed and I'll never carry anything else I love it so much. That being said I did like the just disappears when you carry it. Mines for sale if your are interested. Its got a hardchrome slide and I upgraded to an all metal mag release. Never had a failure in about 150 rounds, if that, shot thru her. The folks over at KTOG have lots of info on the Keltecs.

September 7, 2008, 11:32 AM
PF-9 isn't a bad choice. I went with a P-11 though. The difference in thickness isn't really all that noticeable to me and I get 10 +1 rounds. I'm up to over 500 rds now without a failure.

September 7, 2008, 01:35 PM
I just bought a PF 9 week before last. I put 100 rounds of FMJ Blazer Brass, plus an assortment of Federal Hydrashoks that were more than a few years, and some MagTech 115grJHP +p, through it. All told almost two hundred rounds. So far No Problems at all.
Recoil is brisk. But not unmanageable. Trigger is very smooth at about five LBS. And with a little practice I was able to stage the trigger towards the end of my shoot. Accuracy was better then I thought, and got better when I was able to stage the trigger.
I have been carrying it in a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster.
I have altered the holster already, in that I added a flat piece of nylon covered plastic at the bottom, and outside edge of the holster basically made a flap to cover the outline of the pistol. The grip does print in jeans pocket. DeSantis Superfly pocket holster does the same thing, but I already had the Nemesis.
This is a work gun for me. I have to have my shirt tucked in. I have been carrying a SP101 in a Nemesis, and will continue to do so, except when it's HOT. I didn't mind the weight of the SP101, unless it's hot and humid, as it gets that way here in Ohio summers. Then it gets uncomfortable. Especially when you've been on your feet and walking all day in a work shop with no air. With the PF 9 at almost half the weight, and a spare mag and fifteen rounds, I don't feel under gunned.

September 7, 2008, 01:41 PM
Check out this old thread:

PF-9 vs. J-frame and a few others, with comparison photos.


Dollar An Hour
September 7, 2008, 02:48 PM
Check out the Kahr PM9... Mine has put my J-Frames on the back burner in my CCW rotation. Better sights, smooth trigger, much more pleasant to shoot (equals more practice time), and greater capacity than a J-Frame.

Mine has been perfectly reliable.

deputy tom
September 7, 2008, 03:55 PM
Downrange TV had a video a while back that Walt Rauch did.He said that a revolver would work more often than not compared to pocket autos.I tried a Google search to provide a link without avail.I thought at the time it made perfect sense.YMMV.tom.

September 7, 2008, 04:58 PM
that fella is probable right to. That being said I will take my kahr PM9 over all the Smith J frames i ever owned. Still own the pre lock earia model 60 bought back in early 70's. I shoot my kahr better, hold more rounds, it is liter , it is smaller, it goes bang every time..

September 7, 2008, 05:15 PM
thanks everyone thinking maybe just hold on to the 642 until October we have a gun show coming maybe get a good deal on a PF 9 see how i like it then decide if it will replace the 642. I normally don't like having two weapon for the same reason but I think this might be the best thing in this case. Went to the owner group that was suggested by BaBalouie and those guys seem to have trouble with some of thier pf9's but other seem to love them. well thanks again.

be safe

September 7, 2008, 05:19 PM
I've owned and carried the 642 and PF9. Both were fine little pistols. PF9 was a little slimmer, worked well enough, but I didn't have the confidence in it I had in the 642. In the end I sold the PF9 and kept the 642.

All that being said, my 642 was replaced a while back by a Kahr PM9... best decision I ever made. Miles ahead of the Keltec or the 642.

If you enjoyed reading about "kel tec pf9 vs 642" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!