Kel-Tec PF9 vs. Bersa Thunder CC

[briang2ad]

I know - 9mm is way more potent than the 380. BUT... in handling the two, I find the Bersa a very nicely put together piece - defanged, smaller than its Thunder brother, nice trigger, good grip, etc.

WIth the Kel-Tec - the trigger is not comfortable, its not as well made, but it is effective, 9mm, and somewhat smaller.

Thoughts?

 

[PX15]

FWIW:

IMO the Bersa will feel better in the hand and will be a pleasure to shoot...

The KelTec will not feel as well in the hand, and will not, necessarily, be a pleasure to shoot.

But all things being equal no-one is going to say the 380rd is comparable to the 9mm round...

My choice would be, (if I didn't have other choices) the KelTec over the Bersa simply because of the better round, but I'd shoot enough rounds through it do make SURE it's reliable before I relied on it for personal protection..

Just personal opinion/no offense to Bersa or KT lovers..


Jesse

 

[jocko]

kel tec

is much liter than any bersa, other than that the Bersa IMO is a better made gun and most all Bersa owners never complain about them either. But its heavier and not just an ounce or so.

 

[Holgersen]

I carry a Bersa thunder CC all the time. I carry it more than any of my other guns just because it's easier to conceal. I also picked it over the Kel tec because I didn't like the feel of the kel tec and I liked the features of the Bersa. Shaved hammer, safety, and a DA/ SA trigger, which I am used too. It basically has the same configuration as my larger guns just more compact.

As far as ammo I'm not to worried about the .380. The only thing I have really been worried about is that if I ever had to use it I would pop off the rounds to quick and not have any left for anyone else.

 

[saturno_v]

I love Bersa products (I carry sometimes a full size Thunder 40) but I would go with the Kel-Tec for even more concealability and more power.

For range use, the Thunder 380 is more appropriate, better balanced, better finishing, a more sedate round for the weight make it pleasant to shoot.

For the Kel-Tec I would get a P-11 over the PF-9, basically the size is the same, just a hair wider, is double stack (up to 12 rounds with flush magazines) and it has been around many years, a more proven design

I regularly carry a P-11 in my pocket, even in a business attire.

Again Kel-Tec pistols are not for extensive range use (even the company acknowledge that) as they can be uncomfortable, just enough to keep your proficiency with it.

Keep in mind that the 9 mm round is not only more powerful but on average is cheaper compared ot the .380

So my final advice would be go for the Kel-Tec if you do not plan a lot of range activity and just strict extreme (i.e. pants pocket) concealed use, Bersa if you want to shoot often.

However Bersa offers a compact version of its full size Thunder pistols, chambered in 9, .40 and .45, however they are bigger than the Thunder 380...so not really pocketable handguns.

 

[doglb]

I put away my j-frame for the PF-9. I have had nothing but good luck with the Pf-9 so far and its alot easier for me to carry it than the j-frame. I must admit that the Bersa CC is a nice piece. However, with the PF-9 being a 9mm vs the 380 I would have to go with the Kel Tec.

The only thing I added to the Kel Tec was a Hogue Handall Jr. grip which to me makes a world of difference.

I hear that their customer service is also good even though I have not had the opportunity to use them. (A good thing)!!!!!

I just feel overall that the Pf-9 is easier, lighter to carry. I know if you read alot of reviews its been hit or miss with the Kel Tec. I have had nothing but great results.

My 2 cents!

 

[FMJMIKE]

I would get the Bersa..........