I plan to start setting up my new Sub2000 the way I want and thought I'd see what other owners' experiences were. The way I figure, I want to keep shots on an 8" target as far as possible. Am I selling the rifle short? I'll be hand loading the ammo, so I can tune it for the gun if needed, though I'd prefer not to have yet another 9mm load to wrangle. I also prefer to use sights that maintain its foldable feature which limits me to the factory sights and associated aftermarket upgrades. I think I may try one of Blitzkrieg's Chevron front sights if they'll fit.
Accuracy Goal for a Keltec Sub2000
- Thread starter DMW1116
- Start date
- Status
Speedo66
Member
I found this bolt tube cover to be a good product, insulates your cheek from hot or cold and provides a little recoil buffering to your face.
Not sure if it will help your accuracy though.
http://www.tacticoolproducts.com/sub-2000bolttubecover/
Not sure if it will help your accuracy though.
http://www.tacticoolproducts.com/sub-2000bolttubecover/
doubleh
Member
Deleted.
I plan to use some Gallant 135 grain coated cast bullets and would really like to try the Lehigh 65-68 grain XD projectiles.
I know it likely won’t shoot terribly tight groups but I haven’t shot it that much and don’t want to underestimate it. For what it’s worth it has been 100% reliable so far with all manner of oddball hand loads I had left over for other 9s.
I know it likely won’t shoot terribly tight groups but I haven’t shot it that much and don’t want to underestimate it. For what it’s worth it has been 100% reliable so far with all manner of oddball hand loads I had left over for other 9s.
halfmoonclip
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,750
The heavier bolt handle (from HB?) is a worthwhile addition as well; it reduces the shoulder and cheek pounding.
Getting down on the sights is the biggest challenge to accuracy with the SUB; wish they had engineered taller sights on the Second Generation. It is such a great, and really clever design; it really does deserve a little better build quality (unhappily, a common complaint with KelTec stuff), and better OEM sights.
I don't recall the exact particulars, but I could hit distant clangers with mine, and it worked all the time.
Moon
Getting down on the sights is the biggest challenge to accuracy with the SUB; wish they had engineered taller sights on the Second Generation. It is such a great, and really clever design; it really does deserve a little better build quality (unhappily, a common complaint with KelTec stuff), and better OEM sights.
I don't recall the exact particulars, but I could hit distant clangers with mine, and it worked all the time.
Moon
Demi-human
maybe likes firearms a little bit…
Only if you, “do your part.”
I’d think it no less capable than any other 9mm carbine, @DMW1116. 8” plates at a hundred and further should be as doable as the eyes are.
My BIL’s was not my cup of tea, but the barrel was straight and the action cycled. After that, it’s the bullets and where you sent them. It seemed fine to me.
(I didn’t send them very far…
)My intent was to have a 100 yard and less rifle that’s cheap to shoot but also centerfire. If it weren’t for the sights it would be nearly perfect. I plan to try a different front post and if that doesn’t fully take care of it then an MCARBO rear sight.
someguy2800
Member
I have no experience with a sub 2000, but the 4 different 9mm carbines I’ve owned, which were a hi point and 3 different AR’s, would all do around 3-5” groups at 100 yards with a scope on them. The best of the lot was my first AR I built with a Faxon barrel which would do like baseball size groups with ammo it liked
chicharrones
needs more ammo
My 9mm CX4 with red dot is a 5" to 6" paper puncher at 100 yards with FMJ ammo. I figured it just isn't worth scoping.
Last edited:
I think I’ll get a box of 115 FMJ to run through just to get a base comparison. So far it has only shot my hand loads. Most or maybe all of them were made to favor other 9s. It seems to like my 147 grain XTP load for my S&W pistols. It also seems to dislike the 147 grain Berrys load, which my Shield seems to love.
Mosin Bubba
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,936
It'll do fine at 100 yards. Past that, the trajectory of the 9mm becomes more of an issue than any mechanical accuracy limitations.
I am happy with my 9mm Sub 2K stock and as it is. I have shot a 40 S&W version that definitely could use a bolt cover, but I haven't found the 9mm rifle objectionable at all.
I am happy with my 9mm Sub 2K stock and as it is. I have shot a 40 S&W version that definitely could use a bolt cover, but I haven't found the 9mm rifle objectionable at all.
FL-NC
Member
IMO 9mm carbines like that are at their best in the HD role and as a companion in a vehicle, on road trips, etc. I would mount a RDS and zero for 50 yards with the expectation of using at closer distances if required. Targets would be 8" plates or A zone on IPSC targets. I understand that RDS mounting on those things requires a swivel mount of some type if you intend to fold it up for storage.
An RDS cures nearly all the issues with sight height and alignment but takes away the biggest feature. I have one on my Victory pistol I could pull off and try on it before dedicating one to it. It might be the best thing since sliced bread and likely beneficial if I do some load development just for this rifle. Then I'm in for one of the pivot mounts and back to iron sights for the Victory. Not a bad thing. I'm not sure it helps that much anyway and is hard to find on the pistol sometimes.
Txhillbilly
Member
Just buy the optics mount from MCARBO, and you will still have the ability to fold it. Plus, it makes for a much better shooting experience over trying to use the factory sights. With a quality RDS, you won't have any issues with loosing your zero once you set it, it is very repeatable.
halfmoonclip
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,750
Txhillbilly's photo clear shows the MCarbo weighted bolt handle that I had mentioned (and misrecalled the maker).
It not only gives you a much better hold on the bolt handle, over the skinny OEM, but the extra weight really does tame the recoil bump and cheek pounding.
They are money well spent.
Moon
It not only gives you a much better hold on the bolt handle, over the skinny OEM, but the extra weight really does tame the recoil bump and cheek pounding.
They are money well spent.
Moon
wesmonster
Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2019
- Messages
- 383
I love my gen 2 Sub2k but compared to some of my other 9mm carbines it's just not as accurate.
But it's not ammo picky and it's reliable. With a red dot at 25 yards 2" to 3" groups are the norm. At 50 yards it will group within 8" which IMHO is reasonable for off the shelf 9mm loads.
IMHO 50 yards is a reasonable expectation for a 9mm carbine. Anything beyond that will take avery good carbine shooting very good ammo. My CX4 Storm carbine with a 4x scope shooting good quality 124 gr. NATO loads will group at 100 yards as good as the Sub2k at 50 yards.
But the Sub also shoots cheap 115 gr Blazer brass (not aluminum!) as well as 124 gr NATO. Don't try any aluminm cased ammo in your Sub, issues are common with all brands of aluminum case. Steel case is fine.
But it's not ammo picky and it's reliable. With a red dot at 25 yards 2" to 3" groups are the norm. At 50 yards it will group within 8" which IMHO is reasonable for off the shelf 9mm loads.
IMHO 50 yards is a reasonable expectation for a 9mm carbine. Anything beyond that will take avery good carbine shooting very good ammo. My CX4 Storm carbine with a 4x scope shooting good quality 124 gr. NATO loads will group at 100 yards as good as the Sub2k at 50 yards.
But the Sub also shoots cheap 115 gr Blazer brass (not aluminum!) as well as 124 gr NATO. Don't try any aluminm cased ammo in your Sub, issues are common with all brands of aluminum case. Steel case is fine.
- Status
Similar threads
