Kel-tec PF9, Ruger LC9, Had Both, Sold 1


PDA






sigbear
September 24, 2011, 04:13 PM
I recently bought both the Kel-tec PF9 and the Ruger LC9. I put 200 rounds through ea. ( with a buddy to share the recoil with), had about 15 FTE/FTF's with the Kel-tec and none with the LC9.

Cleaned both guns and shot 200 rounds through ea. again, same deal, about 15 FTE/FTF's with the Kel-tec and none with the LC9.

Accuracy was pretty equal with both guns, the LC9 has a very looooooong trigger pull. IMO looking at both side by side the quality of the LC9 is apparent. I would have been happy with the Kel-tec if it had 0-issues but that was not the case, sure, I could have gone back and forth with Kel-tec but it was a lot easier taking a $beating on it and keeping the LCR which so far has been 100% reliable.

From what I've been reading the Kel-tec PF9 is hit or miss, in my case I guess I missed.

Sigbear

If you enjoyed reading about "Kel-tec PF9, Ruger LC9, Had Both, Sold 1" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
KAS1981
September 24, 2011, 04:51 PM
My main reason for purchasing the LC9 was my perceived build quality of the pistol. It seems really solid.

After the excitement wore off after buying my LC9, I felt kind of luke-warm towards it. Mostly due to that trigger. The safeties, if I want, I can get rid of.

I've got about 300 rounds through it now with no malfunctions. It's obviously no target pistol, but my accuracy with it has been more than adequate. I can only assume I'll get better with practice.

It is my main carry pistol and I really like it.

Mike1234567
September 24, 2011, 05:00 PM
I'll give you $100 shipped for your messed up PF9.:evil:

EdJennings
September 24, 2011, 05:57 PM
My PF9 has never malfinctioned and is suprisingly accurate. When I bought it, the LC9 didn't exist.

MedWheeler
September 25, 2011, 09:15 PM
Uh, okay. My PF-9 has been flawless, and the money saved has already been spent at the range. But thanks for sharing; others may use this to make their decisions, and they likely won't go wrong with the Ruger. The Kel-Tec is a simpler, less-refined, and of a less-expensive design; the Ruger may or may not be more reliable, is assembled a little more tightly, has a manual safety (for those who like them), and is priced accordingly to those attributes.

MrWesson
September 25, 2011, 09:37 PM
Some of the better prices Ive seen on the LC9 is ~350

You can get a Pf9 right now from CDNN for 229.

That plus the fact the LC9 has a thumb safety and mag disconnect leans towards the PF9 IMO.

You have to check to see if your Pf9 has the old or new feed ramp(google) if it has the new and you are still having problems then you are a rarity.

Dollar An Hour
September 26, 2011, 04:50 AM
I can't blame you for your decision, it makes sense to me.

My PF-9 wasn't 100% either, so I sold it to a guy who likes to tinker with his guns and enjoys a challenge. I just want a gun to work without fiddling around.

I think the odds of getting a good PF-9 are much better than they were 18-24 months ago. That's the norm with Kel-Tec, their stuff gets dialed in over time, and customers do the beta testing.

I've got a Kel-Tec .32 that's been perfect for years, but their P32 has been around forever and they've got them down in terms of reliability by now (or by five years ago for that matter).

The_Armed_Therapist
September 26, 2011, 07:29 AM
Kel-Tec can be finicky with cheap ammo... Perhaps cheap ammo was used? That's really no excuse, I'm just trying to pinpoint the problem with that PF-9.

mgmorden
September 26, 2011, 08:18 AM
Some of the better prices Ive seen on the LC9 is ~350


That's less than a PF9 at my local gun shop.

I was in there browsing (God knows that I'll never buy a gun from those price gougers, though they do get my money for powder/primers), and saw that they had new Kel-tec PF9's for the super-low price of $380. :banghead:

Anyways, back on topic: it could just be that you got a dud Keltec. It happens with any manufacturer. It can be frustrating and ruin your opinions, but I can guarantee you that somewhere out there there's a guy with an LC9 that isn't feeding right either, and if he happens to also have a PF9 then he's probably all over the net proclaiming the Kel-tec to be better. I'd say let Keltec have a shot (pun very much intended) at fixing it before writing it off.

F-111 John
September 26, 2011, 10:49 AM
Nutnfancy's PF9 vs. LC9 Shootout: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzhapH0CaUE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzhapH0CaUE)

Hickok45's LC9 vs. PF9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiXbGwnVhVY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiXbGwnVhVY)

Not having done my own head-to-head, I'd trust either one of those guys.

JustinJ
September 26, 2011, 03:25 PM
I got a LC9 after too many issues with my PF9. I'm happy with the decision but would be much happier if the LC9 had a decent trigger.

dsb1829
September 27, 2011, 11:45 AM
I had an LC9, now I have a PF9. IMO the Keltec is easier to grip and has a better trigger. The ruger has a higher level of fit and finish to it. The PF9 has a fairly loose slide fit as well. I bought it used and didn,t even fire 50rd before the take down pin failed. That was near a deal breaker for me. However I got a new pin and have continued to use the gun. It is growing on me. The ruger and I just never bonded. I could deal with it, but IMO it requires too much focus for me to keep it on target. In a self defense situation I likely won't be able to put 100% of my focus to the gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kel-tec PF9, Ruger LC9, Had Both, Sold 1" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!