[Jeff H]

Having felt both guns at the fun shop and reading a bunch of threads here, the general consensus was that they are about the same gun with the Ruger being a little more polished and the Kal-tec being cheaper. The price of the LCP has come down considerably and now is about $30-40 more than the L3AT which is only a couple boxes of ammo. My question has to do with whether either one has problems or downfalls that would make me want to buy the other. I didn't see much in the search archives that would indicate a design problem with either gun, so maybe it comes down to personal preference. Comments?

[shooter1]

I'm a fan of the Kel Tec line. I currently own 1 P32-----2 P3ATs----2 P11s-----and a PF9. I don't own an LCP, but have shot one belonging to a friend. As the LCP is a close copy of the P3AT, there was no significant difference that I could detect between the two. I think you'd be happy with either one. I do like the slide locking back on the empty mag feature that Ruger added to the design. Both have good customer service, so it should be pretty much equal there. Guess it pretty much boils down to personal preference.
str1

[o Unforgiven o]

I can't speak to the P3AT, but I have put a few boxes of ammo through the LCP and it is a nice little gun. I think they are very comparable and most points would come down to user preference. I think the LCP is a nice gun and feels good in the hand, I like the LSHO and to be honest the looks too. :cool:

[JDGray]

The LCP felt a lot better in my hand, so its what I bought. Keltecs are a bit sharp IWB, without a shirt behind it, where the Ruger has a smoother texture grip.

[glove]

I have and like the Kel-Tec P3AT. :cool:
Dave Z

[PT1911]

IMO, very interchangeable guns... Ruger added a little afterthought manual slide stop as a "perk" to their offering, but that is hardly a deal closer for me...

IMO, Taurus' 738 (tcp) has surpassed them both as it has better sights, a much better trigger, a functioning slide stop, and feels better in the hand (subjective) than either of the others while offering in stainless with two mags for the same price or cheaper than an LCP blued with one mag.

When it comes down to it, they are all quality guns that will serve you well if you understand their limitations.

[kokapelli]

IMO, very interchangeable guns... Ruger added a little afterthought manual slide stop as a "perk" to their offering, but that is hardly a deal closer for me...

IMO, Taurus' 738 (tcp) has surpassed them both as it has better sights, a much better trigger, a functioning slide stop, and feels better in the hand (subjective) than either of the others while offering in stainless with two mags for the same price or cheaper than an LCP blued with one mag.

When it comes down to it, they are all quality guns that will serve you well if you understand their limitations.
In this price range I second the TCP over the LCP and P-3AT.

[Wildbillz]

I went through the same process about two years back. I ended up getting the Ruger due to the way it felt in the hand. I have carried it more then shot it so far as ammo has been scarce. I have been able to find it pretty regular as of late, so I may have to run a few boxs through it.

WB

[ttheel]

Have held both and I just liked the fit and finish of the LCP better. I have owned it for over a year now with Zero malfunctions. Its an accurate little pistol considering its size. From what I understand the P3at is a great little gun also, the LCP just struck my fancy more.

[loadedround]

It's a vanilla or chocolate decision.

[harmon rabb]

Neither. Get the TCP instead. Better design.

[Top_Gunn]

I do like the slide locking back on the empty mag feature that Ruger added to the design.
?? The LCP slide does not lock back on an empty magazine.

[sansone]

compared side by side the LCP is more refined, better fit and finish. Lcp trigger-pull is a little better as well...
yes the slide lock-back is manual use only, no last shot hold-open // the kelTec has no means to hold slide back

[orionengnr]

I have had two LCPs, two P3ATs (and four Kel-Tecs total).
I never owned a Kel-Tec that worked correctly, and they will never see another dime of my money.

Both LCPs worked perfectly.

When I can find a Kahr P380, I may lose the LCP. That is the only replacement I will consider. Taurus? No. :scrutiny:

[Paul7]

My LCP went back to the factory three times before they gave up on it and gave me a refund. It was replaced with the Kel-tec, which has been great. In addition to actually working, the KT has a better trigger, is lighter, and to me is easier to grip with more thorough checkering.

[theammobroker]

I would go with the LCP. My only disappointment with the LCP is that the slide does not lock back after shooting the last round. Otherwise, it's a great CLOSE IN gun. Not for long range work.

[joe_security]

Take a look at the Kahr P380. Real sights (NS option) and a much better trigger, match barrel, slide locks back when empty. And a huge price tag to go with it. Its a choice only the individual can make.

[harmon rabb]

match barrel on a pocket pistol? useless selling point.

[joe_security]

Watch the youtubes and other testfires on the gun and draw your own conclusions.

[Cards81fan]

Neither. Get the TCP instead. Better design.
I am a happy LCP owner, but I agree with this. Had the TCP been available when I purchased my pocket .380, I would own it. It's a much more complete gun. I do prefer the Ruger to the Kel-Tec.

For the record, my father owns a TCP so I have experienced firing many rounds through both. They have both been 100% reliable save for when I do not allow the trigger to reset on the Ruger (it has a seemingly long reset when compared to the TCP).

I will quote myself from earlier posts on this topic, discussing the LCP, TCP, and new S&W Bodyguard:

I am a big fan of the TCP after trying one out at the range. I cannot comment on the S&W, but I own an LCP and think the TCP compares favorably to it for several reasons:

1.The trigger was smoother, shorter, and lighter - but not too short or too light for a carry piece
2.The trigger guard is angled/sloped out, and not back in towards your trigger finger. This allows more room for you if you are wearing gloves (I cannot fit a gloved finger in my LCP without working it in there, and I have small hands). This also prevents the trigger finger from getting slapped against the inside of the guard, which can cause it to go numb (happens to me occasionally)
3.The reset is noticeably shorter on the TCP. About one our of every 20 shots with my LCP I will not release the trigger enough to reset it.
4.The palm swell is a bit fuller on the TCP. Not much, but enough it makes it more comfortable IMHO
5.It has a REAL slide lock and release, meaning it locks back on the last fired round of the magazine

The more I think about it, the more I believe the TCP is a very refined and well thought-out pistol. They took many of the pain points of .380 pistols, and did a great job at resolving those issues. Not to mention this pistol is made in the USA, not Brazil, and the super-patriot inside of me likes that :) In all seriousness, comparing the fit and finish to my father's other Taurus pistols (24/7 in .45 and a Millennium in 9mm), I think the TCP is of noticeably better quality than the Brazil-finished pistols.

IMHO, I don't much care for a laser on a CCW as I would be point-shooting from 3-5 yards most likely, and not brandishing the laser beforehand (apologies to the Crimson Trace marketing department). For the same reasons, the sights are not issue either.

Everyone has different opinions on these pocket pistols. Hell, many people think that unless it's a Rohrbaugh or Seecamp, it's not worth carrying. But I really think Taurus has a good thing going with TCP. I bet if you try one, you'd really like it.

[finz50]

Coming from someone that has owned both...save your money and get the Kel-Tec...spend the $40 difference in ammo and commence to enjoying some time at the range..

[CZguy]

Coming from someone that has owned both...save your money and get the Kel-Tec...spend the $40 difference in ammo and commence to enjoying some time at the range..

It's a personal choice.

I shoot my LCP weekly, but have several other (and larger) pistols for range shooting.

It's hard to find one gun that's good for everything.

[wrs840]

My brother has both, and they both function fine.

He says he likes the LCP better because the more aggressive checkering on the the P3AT grip chews up his palm after about 2 mags-through it. Not a concern, I suppose, for personal protection, but for him it makes the difference between which one he'll practice with and which one sits in the safe.

Les

[Thatguy686]

heres the thing the ruger is better than the kel tec as far as failures go the ruger has none i have almost 7,000 rounds thru my ruger no failures before i owned the ruger i had the keltec and shot around 600 rounds thru it and had a failure every mag until i sold it and the taurus is one of the guns that has alot of nice features but the only way you will be happy with it is if you send it back to taurus nonstop for about 2 years till they get it working right

[HadEmAll]

I don't trust Keltec due to experience with 2 previous pistols. Their customer service is great, but that's probably because they get so much practice repairing broken pistols.

My vote is for the LCP. Rugers can also have problems, but I believe the quality is much higher on the average.

[longhair75]

I bought an LCP last Saturday. I looked at the Keltec as well, and I agree that the fit and finish of the LCP is better.