Kel-Tec PF-9 Any Good??

[Snubby 38]

Tried to scrape together a few hard earned dollars and was considering purchasing a Kel-Tec PF-9, hard chrome with black frame. I've looked at the Kel-Tec owners web site and haven't found much. Have heard comments ranging from, "wonderful" to, "I wouldn't own one". Anyone had any experience with this 9MM?
Thanks guys!

 

[tinygnat219]

Just bought one myself, Have only fired one box through it so far. Not bad, but if you are looking for a plinker, this ain't it. For a BUG, it's not bad.

 

[MJZZZ]

Snubby, I bought mine 3 months ago and it has been back to Kel Tec twice. It has now had every single part on the gun replaced at least once, I just haven't gotten out to test it since I got it back. I don't drink the Kel Tec kool-aid, so I really have my doubts whether I'll ever trust this gun to carry. I have never finished a range session without it malfunctioning and it having to be repaired in some way. Unfortunately I bought 2 extra mags and a holster, so I'm guarenteed to lose at least $100 if I dump it. It is light and slim so if it would ever prove itself reliable, I would carry it. Some PF9 owners shoot 150 rounds and call it proven reliable. It would have to shoot 300 errorfree rounds for me to even consider it broken in, let alone reliable. Kel Tec service is outstanding, unfortunately after no less than 7 revisions the gun is not a finished product yet. Mike

 

[Clipper]

Mine is great. Eats anything I've fed it and never a hickup. It has replaced my P3AT as my primary.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I've had mine for almost a year. I've mentioned in many threads that I had light strike issues ont he first outing, that was attributed to sub-zero temperatures and a viscous lubricant in the firing pin channel. Once cleaned, the gun has run flawlessly through a dozen boxes, including +p ammo.

As tiny said, definitely a carry gun/BUG. The extremely light weight makes it rather unpleasant to fire extensively.

Do a search on the PF9 here; you'll find plenty.

 

[Blarelli]

My bud bought one this week, and I was kind of surprised at how well it did. It did have one failure to eject (stuck in the chamber) on the last round, but overall I liked it. Not bad to shoot, and if you are used to a double action revolver, pretty accurate. At 25 feet, I was able to get 3 quick shots off in about the size of my fist, and at 25 yards, I could keep all my shots on a sheet of paper. Only real problem I saw was the mag which is supposed to hold 7 could only handle 6.

 

[gunman42782]

I bought one and the trigger return spring kept coming out of the groove it rides in and disabling the trigger. I just read in the latest issue of American Rifleman that they had the same problem! I sent the gun back to Kel-Tech requesting a refund and they gave me my money back.

 

[jwxspoon]

So far so good on mine, about 150 rounds into it and not a single failure. Pretty sharp recoil, more than any other 9mm I own.

jw

 

[Bill B.]

A buddy of mine just bought a PF-9 and we took it for a range session last week. I would guess he ran at least 150 rounds through his without issue. I ran a clip through just to check the recoil which I didn't find unbearable and the trigger was decent. It looks cheap but it works! I do think I would change out the guide rod for a metal aftermarket which he said was available as that looked the cheapest of all. For a carry nine at a cheap price I think it's worth a look. My 2 cents .......

 

[Storm]

I just shot mine this past weekend for the first time. When I bought the gun by coincidence the previous owner of the the gun was in the shop. He told me that he had put 150 rounds through the gun without any malfunctions and with good accuracy. I shot the gun at 12 and 25 yards. At 25 yards I kept seven rounds all inside an eight inch bull. At 12 yards all rounds went within a four to five inch target. The first three rounds were one ragged hole. The gun was far more accurate that I had anticipated and I feel that I can do even better with more work. The muzzle flip is considerable but I had no problem bringing the gun back down for a return shot. There is nothing unpleasant about firing the gun. I had no malfunctions. The gun didn't miss a beat. All in all I'm thrilled with the gun and only having shot 115 gr. WWB it's on its way to becoming my carry gun.

 

[Snubby 38]

Thanks guys for all your input. Again, a mixed bag, love-em or leave-em, but lots of food for thought... thanks again.
Snubby 38

 

[camsdaddy]

Ok I am really glad to see this thread. I currently carry a P32 and have been eyeing this PF9 since they came out. I was at a shop on Sat and held one again I like them alot I am debating between this and a S&W 642/638 snub. I think both would be great for what I want just cant decide. I am looking for a pocketable edc gun. The only advantage I find in the Smith is that I could you shot shells in the summer. Any benifits one way or the other.

 

[jahwarrior]

my brother just bought one last week. i had been wanting one, so i was excited to try his out. i can only fault it one 2 points:

1. the recoil is pretty snappy on it, but what do you expect for a featherweight? put 100 rounds through it, and you'll definitely be hurtin'.

2. it's a royal pain in the culo to reassemble. there's a trick you have to perform with the barrel before you slide the assembly pin back in; it took me and my bro 1 hour to figure it out.

other than those 2 points, it's a great gun, and it only cost him $269 NIB, plus an extra mag with a pinky ext.

 

[Storm]

Snubby, I did a good amount of research on the PF9 before buying one and there seems to be a cutoff with the serial number after which the initial teething problems were cleared up. A good amount (but probably not all) of the negatives out there can be attributed to early production issues. From what I know serial numbers starting with "R0" and higher (mine's an "R3") are production after the improvements were made to the gun that dealt with the issues. The "RO" may not be the actual cutoff point, but I know that at least an R0 is good.

 

[Rex B]

I don't have a PF9, but I have a P11 (my 3rd), and a P3AT (my 2nd).
Both these are flawless.

When the P11 came out, many of them had problems, which the factory address or refunded. After the first year or two the chances of getting a problem child became pretty remote. The last two of mine have been flawless.
Same with the P3AT. Both mine have been 2nd gen, and have never failed.

Personally, I decided to stick with my P11 a while longer.
the P3AT is my daily carry. Both are in the chrome over navy blue colors, which I like a lot. Maybe by the time the PF9 comes out in Chrome/blue it will have the kinks worked out.
And then there's that 2nd strike capability. The P11 and P3AT have it, but the PF9 doesn't, as I understand it.

 

[Glockman30]

I have had mine about 2 months and put 200 rounds through it. I had one FTE within the first 10 rounds and since then it has been error free and really a good shooter. It is accurate and it replaced my P3AT as a carry gun. It has a sharp recoil so I don't enjoy shooting it at the range, but I shoot a box of ammo every chance I can to practice since I carry it a lot. Second magazine was $28 shipped and hogue wrap around grip was $10. I paid $299 for the gun.

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s146/scohen817/Keltec002.jpg

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s146/scohen817/Keltec001.jpg

 

[Clipper]

P3AT does NOT have second strike...It is the same action as the P-32 and PF-9. The P-11, P-40, and P-357 share an action that does.

 

[gbelleh]

My PF-9 has over 600 rounds through it with no problems. I've had very good luck with Kel-Tec. My P-32, P-11, P3AT and P-F9 have all been reliable.

The PF-9's recoil is harsh, but it makes a great t-shirt weather carry gun.

 

[GEM]

American Rifleman had a review and the test one broke. That's the risk with Kel-tecs.

 

[daehawc]

PF9

I just picked mine up a few weeks ago and so far haven't had any problems in the first 100 rounds. From the KTOG boards the newest cutoff for reliability was the serials starting with at least R3Sxx. I picked mine up since I found a R3Uxx. Like everyone said, the recoil is noticeable for a 9 but it offers more power than the .380 in a package not all that much bigger.

 

[denfoote]

2. it's a royal pain in the culo to reassemble. there's a trick you have to perform with the barrel before you slide the assembly pin back in; it took me and my bro 1 hour to figure it out.

jahwarrior,

That's a big 10-4!!

I just brought mine home today and field stripped it for cleaning and putting it back together.

I spent my required hour using about a half pack of smokes, with a startled cat from the loud curse when the slide initially snapped back on my index finger, and much frustration!!!!

Lord in heaven!!!

I don't think I've had this much trouble since I first took apart my Ruger MK-II!!!

 

[Storm]

From the KTOG boards the newest cutoff for reliability was the serials starting with at least R3Sxx. I picked mine up since I found a R3Uxx.

Yup, there seems to be an issue with the ejector pin "walking" that has been fixed with the new G model frames starting with R3Sxx. Older D and E models can be sent in for a retrofit for this fix.

Man, if you read the history of the history of the PF9 at the KTOG board it reminds me of WWII German tank production.

 

[Clipper]

Those who trouble themselves to read the assembly/disassembly instructions don't have any problems...

And yes, I too was too arrogant to think I needed to read 'em with my prior experience, but it took about 5 minutes to decide to check the instructions...

 

[barnetmill]

Mine is in the RO series. The major issues was the magazine catch. It is plastic and lasted only for the first magazine full and then it sheared off. Kel-Tec sent a new plastic one and I now depress the catch prior to inserting a magazine. I have purchased a metal after market mag catch, but have yet to install it.

 

[denfoote]

Those who trouble themselves to read the assembly/disassembly instructions don't have any problems...

I was following Packers instructions on KTOG. My hand slipped off the slide as I was pulling it back, largely because, like an idiot, I forgot to wash the gun oil off my hands when I finished cleaning and lubing it!!

I always take my time the first time I field strip a gun.

The frustration set in when I read that it you didn't do the hold the barrel in through the ejection port thing right, the assembly pin would not seat. Well I couldn't get the pin to give me the loud click that indicated that it was indeed set!! I did the prodedure over and over until out of frustration, I set the gun down on the bench and pressed really hard on the pin and finally heard the click!!

Now I know.

Still, I have to say that the procedure IS not unlike that for the MK-II.