Pocket 380acp, Ruger or Keltec?


PDA






Wildbillz
May 5, 2012, 03:45 AM
Hi All
I am thinking of getting a small pocket type auto for CCW. I am thinking of a Ruger LCP or a Keltec. Both are basicly the same gun. Any reason to prefer one over the other?

WB

If you enjoyed reading about "Pocket 380acp, Ruger or Keltec?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jackblack86
May 5, 2012, 04:29 AM
Get the origanal not the copy keltec

meanmrmustard
May 5, 2012, 08:45 AM
+1 for KelTec.

jon_in_wv
May 5, 2012, 09:30 AM
I've had both and they are for all intensive purposes the same. The Ruger has slightly better fit and finish but they shoot about the same.

I no longer own either and I have the S&W bodyguard for several reasons. The P3AT and the Ruger both have poor control of the top round in the magazine. When you fire the weapon the top round impacts the bottom of the feed ramp causing a "smiley" on the round. If you use a softer JHP this will partially smash the HP degrading bullet performance. If you use harder ones like the XTP the bullet will be set back into the case. FMJs may or not set back depending how hard the bullet is. The P3AT/LCP also have EXTREMELY thin chambers. The BG is 3 times thicker at its thinnest point than the others at theirs. I believe using hot ammo in a P3At/LCP with the bullet setback and super thin chamber is not a wise move. The BG has NO setback issue and a thicker chamber so it is able to fire a wider variety of ammo safely and with better performance because the bullets are not damaged by the cycling of the weapon.

In addition to the chamber issues the BG is a true double action only design. The hammer is not partially preset by the slide so short stroking the trigger will not effect reliability or require both hands to rack the slide if it happens. You simply pull the trigger again.

Lastly the sights on the BG are worlds above what you get on the other two. I've already hard all the silly arguments about these guns being "belly" guns and honestly that is just ignorance. You wouldn't buy a larger pistol if you couldn't shoot it accurately so why would you a 380? All three are capable of much more accuracy than you would think. Mechanically they are more accurate than you are by a long shot. The BG has better sights and is slightly larger in the hand making it a little easier to tap into that accuracy. Last weekend I was shooting my BG at broken clays at 25 yards and I had no problem hitting them about 8 out of 10 times.

Choose which on you like best. My preference is the BG if you are going to use it for main carry. If it is a BUG the LCP is a bit smaller, sleeker, and shoots about as well. The P3AT will do everything the LCP does but I think the QC of the Ruger is a little better and you probably stand a better chance of being happy with the LCP. That being said, Keltecs customer service is first rate.

Gary A
May 5, 2012, 10:12 AM
Wildbillz - I was faced with the same decision not too long ago. I bought the Kel-Tec for three reasons: 1. Holding them both in the store I felt I could get a better, more secure grip on the Kel-Tec with its sharper and more extensive checkering. 2. No offense to Ruger, but I felt like George Kelgren, being the man who started this polymer mini-380 craze deserved the profit from his idea. 3. The Kel-Tec was substantially less money than the LCP.

After buying it, I had a chance to shoot it side-by-side with a friend's LCP and was amazed that, in my hands at least, the LCP was more comfortable to shoot, and considerably more accurate. I did like the Kel-Tec trigger better but could not argue with the results. Figuring Mr. Kelgren already made some profit from me on the P3AT (and I have a P32), I traded the P3AT toward another pistol and shopped around and bought an LCP. Shooting my own LCP has proven (to me) that my first experience was no fluke. I am settled on the LCP and have no regrets.

Walt Sherrill
May 5, 2012, 10:48 AM
I've had both. Found them both to be good, reliable guns. The Ruger was prettier.

For me, the Kel-Tec P3AT, because of the slightly different trigger guard shape, was very painful to shoot: it jammed my trigger finger with most shots. The Ruger didn't. My son inherited the P3AT and didn't have problems with the trigger guard. Like me, he eventually moved on to a PF-9.

With either of the .380s, you'd be ahead of the game to consider using the KTADDONS (KTADDONS.COM) grip materials, which noticeably reduces felt recoil. It's not expensive.

Be warned: a lot of folks have difficulty shooting these smaller guns well, even though they might be excellent shots and quite adept with other guns; be prepared to be disappointed.

I have had both the Kahr P9 (which I sold after someone made me an officer I couldn't refuse) and a K-T PF9. The Ruger LC9 is similar to the PF9, but prettier. I have KTADDONS grips on my PF9.

kokapelli
May 5, 2012, 10:49 AM
Either one is fine and you should also consider the Taurus TCP which is very similar to the KT P3AT and LCP, but in my opinion has a better trigger than both of the other pistols and less felt recoil as well.

brassdog
May 5, 2012, 10:57 AM
Get the origanal not the copy keltec
Get the origanal not the copy keltec

Sarcasm??

I thought the Keltec came first and the Ruger was the copy...

PT92
May 5, 2012, 11:04 AM
Get the origanal not the copy keltec
Uh--I think you have this backwards...:confused:

MachIVshooter
May 5, 2012, 11:06 AM
Sarcasm??

I thought the Keltec came first and the Ruger was the copy...

I'm thinking that's what he meant, just forgot the colon or semicolon.


My vote is KT.

Demitrios
May 5, 2012, 11:10 AM
I'd get the LCP, especially since Buds has them on sale.

That said (and I know I'm not being asked) but I bought the Taurus TCP 738 and I like it even more than either of those two pistols.

1KPerDay
May 5, 2012, 11:45 AM
Ruger every time.

jon_in_wv
May 5, 2012, 12:01 PM
If anyone believed the "buy the original" crap Kimber, Springfield, S&W, etc.......would have gone out of business trying to sell 1911s. I think some people are a little disingenuous with that nonsense.

Gary A
May 5, 2012, 01:00 PM
Jon_in_wv - "buy the original" is as legitimate consideration as any, though certainly not the only or perhaps the deciding one. It may not be a consideration for you, but it is not "crap" unless you regularly consider opinions other than your own to be crap. In that case, it's possible others might have feeling the same about the opinion you just expressed. It cuts both ways, which is why courtesy and mutual respect are such valued commodities.

PT92
May 5, 2012, 01:14 PM
I'd get the LCP, especially since Buds has them on sale.

That said (and I know I'm not being asked) but I bought the Taurus TCP 738 and I like it even more than either of those two pistols.
Saw that Taurus at the range this week and it looked sweet though I did not get a chance to shoot it (Buds and CDNN have some bigtime .380 sales going on).

-Cheers

jon_in_wv
May 5, 2012, 01:35 PM
Jon_in_wv - "buy the original" is as legitimate consideration as any, though certainly not the only or perhaps the deciding one. It may not be a consideration for you, but it is not "crap" unless you regularly consider opinions other than your own to be crap. In that case, it's possible others might have feeling the same about the opinion you just expressed. It cuts both ways, which is why courtesy and mutual respect are such valued commodities.
__________________

I hit the crap button on it because it just doesn't hold true even from the people who proclaim it. It the only 1911 or AR you have every owned is a Colt or you would NEVER buy any other copies, then I'm wrong in your case. Imitation is the name of the game in the firearms business. Even Kelgren copied design principles from someone else to make the P32. He didn't invent any of them. Not one design feature of the Glock was invented by Glock. The qualifying part of my statement was that it was "disingenuous" thus making it "crap" in my book. If it is your genuine opinion that would be different. Now, the fact it is "crap" in my opinion makes it no more so that it someone else thinking it isn't. Its just an opinion.

If you look at the poster who stated, "get the original" he has a bunch of posts about owning other guns that are copies of other brands so even he doesn't believe it. He is simply a fan of Keltecs.


The "get the original" statement generally has no more merit to me than when people criticize my Toyota by saying "buy American" when my Toyota was built in Louisiana and their Chevy is the only American made thing they own and it was made in a plant in Mexico. I'm not talking about people who genuinely believe and apply the principle only those who are "disingenuous". We would all be better off if we were still a manufacturing nation and we bought products made in the US by american workers who made the best products in the world. Sadly, this is not the world we live in.

wild cat mccane
May 5, 2012, 02:53 PM
Kel tec: Grip isn't slippery like the ruger. You don't have to change grip each shot if you are sweating.

BUT DON'Tt get blued in either ruger or kel tec. Get Kel Tec's hard chrome, or get the TCP in stainless.

Man, these suckers wear quickly.

Vote Kel Tec Hard Chromed P3AT or Taurus TCP in stainless.

Nakanokalronin
May 5, 2012, 03:06 PM
I'll be the fly in the ointment and say a P238 for a much better trigger, sights and shootability.

Gary A
May 5, 2012, 03:25 PM
jon_in_wv - you said
Imitation is the name of the game in the firearms business. Even Kelgren copied design principles from someone else to make the P32. He didn't invent any of them.
and I could not agree more. Still, all things being equal, I prefer to see a bootstrap entrepreneur (which I consider George Kelgren to be - as was Bill Ruger in his day) reap the rewards for this thinking and innovation. That said, as I noted, after comparing the two, I prefer the Ruger and am a long time fan of Ruger the company, and many, if not all, of their products.

Gary A
May 5, 2012, 03:29 PM
wild cat mccane -I have had pretty good luck with putting Johnson's Paste Wax on my blued pistols. I usually end up with several coats and semi-regular re-waxing and, of course, the regular oil-rag wipe. I don't even care if the bluing wears, as long as I can avoid rust.

jon_in_wv
May 5, 2012, 05:30 PM
and I could not agree more. Still, all things being equal, I prefer to see a bootstrap entrepreneur (which I consider George Kelgren to be - as was Bill Ruger in his day) reap the rewards for this thinking and innovation.

And I agree with that sentiment but like you said, the better weapon has to win out in the end. "Buying the original" doesn't do me any good if it isn't the best tool to protect my hiney. Both are perfectly capable and both are perfect as a BUG in my book. As a primary carry the Bodyguard is better and gives away very little in size but between the Ruger and the Keltec my vote is for the Ruger.

Sapper771
May 5, 2012, 06:18 PM
I recently bought a well worn Kel-Tec P3AT .380. The blueing on the slide is gone, light rusting in a few spots, dry as a bone, and literally filled with pocket lint. I was looking for a light, thin, pocket pistol to use as a back up to my primary and as a "just down the road" pistol. I swabbed the bore out and shot a few mags through it without cleaning all the crud out. It fired without fail. The funny part was watching the lint blow out of the frame while firing.

I am pleased with the P3AT. What really surprised me was it fed my 105gr SWC bullets like they were round nose. Can't really say much for accuracy, but the trigger is smooth. Still trying to decide if I want to cerakote the slide or just use some flat krylon.

dubya450
May 5, 2012, 06:36 PM
Are you open to other suggestions? If so I'd recommend the sig p238. I've owned a LCP and liked the idea if it, how small light and concealable it is but i HATE the trigger. In the end i sold it very cheap to my grandpa and picked up the p238. Much better "pocket gun" IMO. The quality is definitely there and compared to the LCP the trigger is top notch. It weighs 5-6 more ounces but it is made of an aluminum frame which I like, and love the SA trigger with manual safety. The downside is its about double the price of LCP's in my area but can you put a price on your life?

MedWheeler
May 5, 2012, 08:56 PM
Quote:
Sarcasm??

I thought the Keltec came first and the Ruger was the copy...
I'm thinking that's what he meant, just forgot the colon or semicolon.


Yes, people. Learn your punctuation. Take the following:

"Let's eat Grandma!"
"Let's eat, Grandma!"

Proper punctuation saves lives.

MachIVshooter
May 5, 2012, 09:52 PM
Even Kelgren copied design principles from someone else to make the P32. He didn't invent any of them.

I suppose you mean the Browning short recoil system? Because everything else about the P32 is Kelgren's design, evolved from his first lightweight pocket gun, the Grendel P12, introduced 20 years ago.

KT really is one of the few companies who's designs are very original. They may have issues with first run weapons, but you can't take innovation away from George's resume.

That said, my gripe with the LCP is a much broader issue with Ruger as a company.

The P3AT really did start the micro .380 revolution, too. I suppose one could argue that title for the Seecamp, NAA Guardian, or Kevin ZP98, but they are heavier, wider and blowback operated. Definitley not in the same class as the P3AT and it's copies/imitations.

jon_in_wv
May 6, 2012, 12:13 AM
He did start the micro pistol revolution I will give him that.

TennJed
May 6, 2012, 03:56 AM
Either one is fine and you should also consider the Taurus TCP which is very similar to the KT P3AT and LCP, but in my opinion has a better trigger than both of the other pistols and less felt recoil as well.
I am a Ruger Fanboy that owns a Kel Tec P3AT and I couldn't agree more. Along witht the recoil and trigger, the Taurus has better egros and a slide lock back on the last round. Add that to the fact that they are very commanly found for $199 new, they are the cheapest. I also shoot mine more accurately than my P3AT.

Mine has been flawless through somewhre around 750 rounds. Not a single FTE or FTF.

The only thing the Ruger and Kel Tec have over thr Taurus is their customer service are 2 of the best while Taurus is hit or miss. That is a valid point to consider though

helitack32f1
May 6, 2012, 05:00 AM
Between the two you mention, I would go with the Ruger. Why buy the original when you can buy the much improved and better looking version? That being said, I just sold my LCP. Were I looking for another pocket .380 I would look elsewhere. Probably the Taurus TCP or the Smith Bodyguard. Or if I was rich I would go for the Sig p238. Or the new Colt .380.

76shuvlinoff
May 6, 2012, 09:01 AM
Never had the KT so I can't openly disparage that weapon but I can say I am pleasantly surprised by the accuracy of my "belly gun" LCP at 7 paces.
I stretched a piece of bicycle inner tube around the grip and use the mags with a finger extension, works fine.


.

Taurus 617 CCW
May 6, 2012, 09:16 AM
I have previously owned the Kel Tec P-32 and P3AT. I currently own a Ruger LCP. I really liked the Kel Tec pistols at first but I found a couple of things that they should have addressed before production.

The magazine catch is made of plastic and will shear off if you aggressively slam the magazine into the pistol. I don't do this very often but if I ever needed to do a reload during a defense situation, I am certainly not going to carefully push the mag button until the catch slot clears the button.

The extractor on the new style Kel Tec pistols is held in place by a button head screw. If it isn't loctited, it can work its way out during operation and loosen the tension of the extractor causing a failure to extract.

Other than those two issues, I didn't mind the Kel Tec pistols. I like the ergonomics of the Ruger LCP better. It has a metal guide rod and magazine catch. The frame is made of glass filled nylon which seems to be stronger than the Kel Tec frame (my opinion). Accuracy was good with both guns.

Prince Yamato
May 6, 2012, 10:05 AM
They're the same gun. Buy the least costly of the two.

Walt Sherrill
May 6, 2012, 11:18 AM
Tney're BASICALLY the same gun, but the Ruger version has some enhancements, like how the firing pin is retained, that are different. I like that Ruger difference better.

wild cat mccane
May 6, 2012, 11:22 AM
2 points:

1. Kel Tec owner also owned a business before and shut it down then opened Kel Tec? That wasn't too nice.

2. Kel Tec started the pocket pistol revolution? Huh Better tell that to L.W. Seecamp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seecamp

Walt Sherrill
May 6, 2012, 11:49 AM
Kel Tec started the pocket pistol revolution? Huh Better tell that to L.W. Seecamp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seecamp

I disagree.

Seecamp introduced a very expensive small gun, but there was no revolution associated with that introduction. [Relatively few of them were made, and their relative rareness suggests that they are more of a novelty than anything.]

K-T introduced small guns that worked at least as well as the Seecamp using a wider variety of ammo, and sold them for roughly 1/3 the Seecamp price. Kel-Tec has sold many, many, many more pocket guns than Seecamp and has had much more impact on the marketplace than did Seecamp. I'd argue that KT's presence and low cost alternative is what opened up the market and started the revolution, not the existence of the much more expensive "semi-custom" Seecamps. It was the PRICE POINT that created the revolution -- and Seecamp didn't have much effect, there.

Are the Seecamps better guns? In terms of craftsmanship and refinement, probably; but in terms of functionality, not really. Comparing a Kel-Tec to Seecamp is like comparing a good quartz Timex to a mechanical Rolex; the Rolex is a marvel of craftsmanship and it will be a work of art, beautifuly made -- but the Timex will generally be more accurate.

No bragging rights come with owning a Timex; they do with the Rolex. Same holds true when comparing the KT to the Seecamp.

I've shot a .32 Seecamp, and it was much less pleasant to shoot than the Kel-Tec in the same caliber.

TennJed
May 6, 2012, 12:31 PM
2 points:

1. Kel Tec owner also owned a business before and shut it down then opened Kel Tec? That wasn't too nice.

2. Kel Tec started the pocket pistol revolution? Huh Better tell that to L.W. Seecamp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seecamp
I don't know if you noticed but he mentioned seecamp in his post. I read it to mean that kel tec was the first pocket pistol designed in a way that would be successful enough to be copied. Kinda of similar to glock starting the poly revolution. They were not the first but they put it on the map. Not sure that even seecamp could be considered the first pocket pistol, but is was without a doubt the p3at that started the "craze" which has given us a abundance of pocket 380s

Also I do not know much about Grendel firearms. What did he do that was not nice? I assumes he was like a lot of business owners and innovators and had one company go under and took that experience and turned it into kel tec, which is the 3rd largest us firearms maker. What happened at Grendel that would lable him as a bad guy?

**forgive any spelling and grammar mistakes, sent from my wife's cell phone and I am not familiar with it

jon_in_wv
May 6, 2012, 01:13 PM
I have to agree with Walt. Seecamp made a small pistol first but it was Kelgren that made it affordable for the masses thus kicking off the trend that Seecamp didn't. There are probably 1000 Keltecs sold for every Seecamp.


CORRECTION: In 2010 Keltec manufactured 40,638 pistols in 380 acp and 14831 pistols in 32 acp. LWS Seecamp made 966 32s and 502 380s. That is about 37:1. I would, however, love to have a Seecamp 32.

wild cat mccane
May 6, 2012, 01:52 PM
The LSW380 was copied :D Heard of the NAA Guardian?

Yes, the P3AT is pocketable, but the LSW380 is also 25%+ smaller than the P3AT and the LSW380 came first.

Calm down. I am on my 5th kel tec, and a P3AT is my everyday.

wild cat mccane
May 6, 2012, 01:55 PM
And I am sure you could quantify "the revolution" by reintroducing the auto pocket pistol couldn't we?

"revolution" isn't a quantifiable measure. Sorry.

Jon Coppenbarger
May 6, 2012, 03:24 PM
my choice is the lcp for the money and if with the laser I like the s&w bodyguard.

MCgunner
May 6, 2012, 08:05 PM
I suppose you mean the Browning short recoil system? Because everything else about the P32 is Kelgren's design, evolved from his first lightweight pocket gun, the Grendel P12, introduced 20 years ago.

http://i45.tinypic.com/n392wy.jpg

Actually, the P10 with fixed magazine was first, but the P12 worked a lot better.

For a pocket gun, I LOVE the P12s heal type magazine catch, very ergonomic to use and no chance it'll release in my back pocket while holstered.

MachIVshooter
May 6, 2012, 08:37 PM
"revolution" isn't a quantifiable measure. Sorry.

It is when, within 8 years of it's introduction, you have a dozen+ imitations.

AFAIK, KT was also the first to intoduce such a tiny gun with a tilting barrel short recoil system that made such featherweights tolerable to shoot. Other companies followed suit in short order.

Girodin
May 6, 2012, 10:41 PM
I bought the Ruger for the following reasons:

1. Build quality and fit and finish: I bought my LCP from a friends gun shop. He had two LCPs and a dozen or so P3ATs in stock. He let get out every gun, strip them, and give them all a pretty thorough one over. Both of the LCPs had better fit and finish and simply appeared to be better built than any of the Kel Tecs.

It is far from scientific but it seems I have much less discussion of the need to "fluff and buff" the LCP versus the KT. It wasn't the biggest sample size but comparing guns in the shop that day (and based on the other Ruger and Kel tec products I own/ have owned) I can see why.

2. Slide stop: While it does not hold the slide open after the last round is fired this is nevertheless a feature that sets the LCP apart. If one needs to clear a double feed the first thing one does, after identifying the malfunction, is to lock the slide to relieve pressure so one can strip the magazine and then clear the chamber. Locking the slide back is much harder with no slide stop. In sum, clearing a double feed may be easier with the Ruger. The slide stop is nice to have for other reasons as well.

Either one could probably fill the role they are built to fill. However, I believe the Ruger, being priced fairly close to the P3AT, is the better buy.

I will suggest, based on my experience with my LCP and my KTs, that either way you get the chrome slide. My LCP which has been in my pocket nearly every day for a number of years started to have wear marks on the slide after a couple years. I will say that I have put in a lot of practice draws from my pocket holster, more than most people I'd imagine. However, it is many fewer than with my other carry guns, which don't show the same wear. I have also experienced wear marks on the bluing of my KTs after relatively little use. If I could go back I'd get the hard chrome slide, apart from that I am very happy with my LCP.



They're the same gun. Buy the least costly of the two.

I believe it would be more accurate to say: They are basically the same design. How well that design is executed when it is actually built makes a difference.

tryshoot
May 7, 2012, 04:21 AM
Had problems with 1st gen p3at, Ruger lcp works great.

pockets
May 7, 2012, 08:55 AM
I've had no problems at all with Kel-Tec. I own; a 1st Gen P32, a 2nd Gen P32, two 2nd Gen P3AT's, and a PF9.
None of them required a fluff'n'buff, they've all been reliable out of the box.
I own dozens of carry pistols to choose from, but I usually have a Kel-Tec on me.
YMMV

.

Walt Sherrill
May 7, 2012, 09:39 AM
Re: revolution...

it is when, within 8 years of it's introduction, you have a dozen+ imitations.

If that's the case, the SEECAMP certainly DID NOT start a revolution -- as nobody copied it (i.e., a small, almost-handcrafted all steel mini-gun that was very picky about ammo and very expensive.) Most of the small .32 and .380, especially the ones that sold a LOT (a better sign of a "revolution"), were much less costly and some had some polymer in their makeup if not in their frames. Early on, the NAA guns were popular, but they just sort of faded away.

I had a Grendel P-12. Kind of bulky, ugly trigger, but a true breakthrough in size and function. I think it was just as revolutionary as the Seecamp, but it didn't really start a Revolution, either.

jon_in_wv
May 7, 2012, 10:12 AM
I would define it as a revolution when after its release they began to sell them by the tens of thousands, making it much more mainstream, rather than as an oddity that a few people owned.

BTW, aren't the NAA pistol and the MPA pretty much copies of the Seecamp?

momano
May 7, 2012, 10:57 AM
Wildbillz: I've owned both and love my LCP. I had to get rid of the P3at because it aggravated my arthritis. The heavier LCP is easier on my joints, I quit limpwristing because of the recoil, and my LCP is more reliable for me-- YMMV. Good luck, brother.

dogrunner
May 7, 2012, 11:11 AM
Yeah they are, Jon. Frankly, having used and owned both I'd opt for NAA's product anytime. At the very least, the NAA's WILL shoot what you load 'em with, something you can't say for Seecamp.

The NAA's craftsmanship is nothing to sneer at either and from an appearance perspective they're neck and neck.

Far as the KT products go in comparison to Ruger nearly every comment I've seen herein was pretty reflective of my experience. I was given an old P3AT by a friend that resembled marsupial roadkill......but roadkill that was still functional. I ran no less than four boxes of mixed ammo thru the thing without a hitch....HP/FMJ...from old tarnished crap to the cheap white box stuff from WallyWorld.......it ALL shot and accurately as well.

I took that gun to KT personally, forked over 70 bucks for a hard chrome slide and left for home......that was at about 10 am...........I live 70 odd miles North and by the time I got home two hours later my phone rang from KT telling me that my gun was ready!

I've repaired Ruger's product for a friend that mis-assembled his, and while it sure is a better finished product, I really see no inherent advantage. Having dealt with Ruger's customer service in the past tho, I KNOW KT is the winner in that department.

By the way, not only did KT replace that slide and rebuild the gun internally, they also replaced the BBL...........hard as hell to beat that kinda service!!!

jon_in_wv
May 7, 2012, 12:30 PM
Momano, I mentioned several times in other threads that I felt the LCP had softer recoil. Everyone said I was nuts. At least someone agrees with me.

Cornhusker77
May 7, 2012, 12:39 PM
I've shot them both and own the P3AT
I like the looks of the Ruger, but as others have mentioned, the Kel Tec is much easier to hang on to.
Mine is plenty accurate shooting at 25 ft.

19-3Ben
May 7, 2012, 12:45 PM
My vote is for the Ruger. I went to the range with a friend. He had his P3AT and I had my LCP. He brought some really nasty old comblock .380 in a green box with Cyrillic writing all over it. He couldn't get through a mag in his P3AT without failures to feed and to eject.

He gave me the rest of the box and the Ruger chugged right on along, without ever missing a step. It has not experienced a failure in about 600-700 rounds or so.

I think that the much nicer refinement, trigger, fit/finish is well worth the $25 more that you pay for the Ruger.

kris7047th
May 7, 2012, 12:45 PM
Kel Tec is the original, LCP is a copy. I sold my LCP after getting the S&W Bodyguard.380 which IMO has less recooil, nicer trigger too. Still I would opt for the new M&P Shield over all. Shoots as nice .. better than the bigger M&P (stock) line and more rnds per mag.

19-3Ben
May 7, 2012, 12:52 PM
Still I would opt for the new M&P Shield over all

You're talking about a totally different size class of gun. I don't know that it's really relevant to this discussion.
The keltec and Ruger are both much smaller guns.

theautobahn
May 7, 2012, 01:14 PM
I've shot the LCP, the P3AT and the TCP (Taurus) and I liked the Taurus best of all. The ergonomics felt better, the felt recoil was much less (for me) and it was extremely accurate. I would go with the Taurus.

That being said, I'd like to try the SW Bodygaurd, Sig 238, and Kahr P380 (although they're all significantly more money).

Girodin
May 8, 2012, 03:56 AM
Having dealt with Ruger's customer service in the past tho, I KNOW KT is the winner in that department.

That has not been my experience. I got an LCR (the revolver) for a family member. It has a slight rattle from the transfer bar. The family member was convinced it was problematic and not normal as it was louder than a different model ruger revolver they owned. I talked to Ruger who said it was normal, however they volunteered to send a shipping label and take the gun back and look it over just to make sure. Ruger paid shipping both ways for a gun they knew had no problems just to put a customers mind at ease. Turn around time was very quick as well. They sent the gun back with a list of checks done, it went well beyond the transfer bar issue. Ruger went well above and beyond on that one.

KT on the other hand seems to have had pretty long turn around times more recently. Also search forum member Wally's posts for the CS he has gotten with respect to his RFB rifle.

I don't think it is fair to say that KT's service is really better. I would wager based on owning a number of guns from each manufacture that one is more likely to need to make use of KTs customer service.

Walt Sherrill
May 8, 2012, 08:42 AM
I've had to use CS for both Kel-Tec and Ruger, and they're both topnotch. Whether one is better or not probably depends on how badly the gun was mistreated before it was sent in for repair. <grin>

MICHAEL T
May 8, 2012, 08:53 PM
KEL TEC has been my choice I know have 5 of them protecting my family

dogrunner
May 9, 2012, 11:46 AM
Possibly they've improved in recent years..........My take was relative to a 3 screw .41 BH that I sent for a refinish & upgrade.......the blue was OK IF, that's IF you like seeing screws buffed absolutely flat to the frame and beggin the service dept. for replacements........As I recall, that job took nearly 8 weeks as well.

I've delt with Ruger for way, way over fifty years and I can recall when parts were no issue, you could order what you needed.....they got away from that........I recall when one did NOT experience shoddy workmanship & sullen CS as well.

All I can say is that I have NEVER experienced quicker or more polite service that I cited at KT....they've earned my business for their attitude alone as well as workable products at a good price.

The_Armed_Therapist
May 9, 2012, 12:20 PM
JackBlack, the Kel-Tec was made 5 years before the Ruger. The Ruger is not the original and the Kel-Tec is not the copy.

gym
May 9, 2012, 11:35 PM
Ruger

TennJed
May 10, 2012, 12:17 AM
I will add that I have dealt with both Ruger's and Kel Tec's customer service and IMHO both are so good that it should not factor into the decision between the 2. Both are that good

jackblack86
May 10, 2012, 01:30 AM
Sorry my post wasnt clear I truly meant to say that keltec was the first. I am a big fan of the gun and Keorge kelgren

Kiln
May 10, 2012, 04:23 AM
George Kellgren is one of the true designers of our time who has actually had some revolutionary effect on the firearms world.

Seriously look up this guy's history, it is extremely interesting. Guy is a genius when it comes to creating firearms.

45crittergitter
June 2, 2012, 05:28 PM
Kel-Tec.

giggitygiggity
June 4, 2012, 10:11 AM
Ruger. The Ruger is just a much more refined pistol. The Kel Tec looks cheap. The Ruger is also super reliable.

Bernie Lomax
June 4, 2012, 10:30 AM
I read an account on one of the gun forums about how some guy was having some problems with his LCP so he called up Ruger to complain. Ruger immediately sent him a prepaid shipping box to send in the gun and fixed it free of charge. I read another account from some guy who was having problems with his P3AT and called up Kel-Tec to complain---they told him what was likely wrong with the gun and instructed him to use a file and afro-engineer the solution himself. Those two stories really tell me all I need to know about those two companies' respective attitudes toward customer service and which one I am better off doing business with.

Ruger every time.

Yeah, this.

ponchsox
June 4, 2012, 12:17 PM
Ruger. You couldn't pay me to carry Kel Tec crap.

holdencm9
June 4, 2012, 12:22 PM
Ruger

I like to be able to lock the action open. Also, the price difference around me at the time was like $20, so I went with the LCP.

kokapelli
June 4, 2012, 12:45 PM
I don't carry a KT now but I do have a P3AT that I pocket carried and it worked perfectly for over 3000 rounds before it finally had a rail fail and the only thing I ever did to it was replace recoil springs.

I sent it back to KelTec and they sent me a brand new pistol FREE!

So from my personal experience I don't believe all the negative comments about KT.

X-Rap
June 4, 2012, 12:59 PM
Six of one half a dozen of the other, decent representations of either will shoot and function pretty much alike. There is always the story of "that one gun" that just wouldn't work so I wouldn't put much stock in those examples.
I carry the P3AT daily but know others who have the Ruger and have shot them both enough to know that price would be as much of a deciding factor as anything in my personal choice.
I bought a 32NAA back when they first came out and it seems that the cost for it was about 2x what my KelTec cost and in comparison feels like a brick weighing down my pocket. They are very well made but obviously overbuilt in comparison with the polymer mouse guns so it sets in the safe and I take it to gun shows hoping to sell it for as small of a loss as possible.
The whole KelTec line is pretty interesting and revolutionary isn't out of line IMO. Innovative, efficient, inexpensive and reliable seem to be a hallmark of the company in my dealings with them.

CZguy
June 4, 2012, 02:31 PM
I bought and have carried a Ruger LCP for the last few years. My brother bought a Kel Tec P3AT around the same time frame.

They are both good guns and neither one has ever failed. That's saying quite a lot for the Kel Tec because my brother doesn't clean his guns very often. ;)

spotch
June 4, 2012, 07:29 PM
Ruger.

heeler
June 4, 2012, 10:14 PM
Meh...At times this gets old.
However,I bought an LCP NIB last year on a GB auction for $239 before my $15 ffl fee and $15 shipping fee.
A great deal of little pistol for a very small advance of cash.
It is a smoother design and I find the ability of locking the slide back important enough to buy it over the slightly lower priced P3AT.
But yesterday I went to the gunshow with my brother to look at numerous pistols for conceal carry as he decided it's time again for him to do so after letting his previous license expire and the one small pistol he liked the most, and trust me he knows little about todays small pocket pistols, was the P3AT.
He actually liked the rough gritty grips of it over the LCP,TCP,Kahr(price floored him)of these other 380's.
So go figure.
I am letting him use my LCP and DB 380 next week at the range to really see if he truely wants a pocket 380 as he has never even shot one.
And just for good measure I am allowing him to also use my sweet little Kel Tec P32 that's has been as 100% as my LCP.
Dont be a hating the KT's guys,they are pretty nifty little pistols..And again,I carry a LCP pretty much daily.

abq87120
June 4, 2012, 10:27 PM
Better to be ready to do a "fluff and buff" in the KelTek. The LCP is finished, at least inside, out of the box.

Swing
June 4, 2012, 10:38 PM
Kel-Tec.

heeler
June 4, 2012, 10:38 PM
Well as I said my KT P32 has been absolutely trouble free for 200 rounds.
No fluff and buff or rub a dub dub necessary.

Captain Brown Beard
June 5, 2012, 12:49 PM
I'll be the first to admit I didn't read all 4 pages of this thread, but here's my .02.

I went with Ruger for the simple fact that Ruger has always been an extremely pleasant company to deal with. Their customer service is the gold standard. That being said, Kel-Tec vs Ruger, they're about the same in my eyes. I think your end result will be the same either way.

Fiv3r
June 5, 2012, 04:02 PM
I handled both before I bought my pocket gun, but I went home with an LCP. It just felt more "finished" if that makes sense. I don't leave the house with it.

Nice little just-in-case gun.

Paul7
June 6, 2012, 06:49 PM
KT, my LCP was garbage.

If you enjoyed reading about "Pocket 380acp, Ruger or Keltec?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!