There is nothing as small, light, or economical as the Keltec P3at. I know the .380 round is at the low end of acceptable. To many, it is far below acceptable. My question is not about the caliber (although any opinions on Corbon's DPX in .380 would be appreciated). My question is...is the P3at a reliable and durable firearm (say for 5000 rounds), or is it a great idea poorly executed.
I ask because I have spent close to a year trying to figure this out. I have held them, shot them, cleaned them, read all I could find in magazines and on line, spoken with friends who have friends who carry them, etc.
I get the same info (or lack thereof). Some would never carry one because they are unreliable (but they never owned one). Some love theirs (but have only put 160 rounds through it). Some have heard nothing but good things about them, some have heard nothing but bad thing about them. You get the idea.
I know KelTec has a lifetime warranty, but that is small comfort if my P3 goes tango uniform when I need it, or if the company folds in a few years.
Should I just buy something close, but with a proven record? I would if I could. The J-frame is too bulky for my needs, and I know from experience that revolvers are not as malfunction-proof as some would believe. Mainly, I don't like the size efficiency. I could buy a PM9, but they are not cheap and I have heard just about as many complaints regarding their reliability as I have heard about the P3, and Kahr does not have as good a warranty. I could buy the MK9. It has the reliability issue down, but weighs far more than I want, and still costs 2 1/2 times what the KT costs.
Why not just buy the P3 and experiment? I've done that, but lately I keep thinking about what I recently heard - the P3at works great right up until they don't.
So my questions remains...is the P3at a reliable and durable gun or an exercise in wishful thinking.
Moonshot
I ask because I have spent close to a year trying to figure this out. I have held them, shot them, cleaned them, read all I could find in magazines and on line, spoken with friends who have friends who carry them, etc.
I get the same info (or lack thereof). Some would never carry one because they are unreliable (but they never owned one). Some love theirs (but have only put 160 rounds through it). Some have heard nothing but good things about them, some have heard nothing but bad thing about them. You get the idea.
I know KelTec has a lifetime warranty, but that is small comfort if my P3 goes tango uniform when I need it, or if the company folds in a few years.
Should I just buy something close, but with a proven record? I would if I could. The J-frame is too bulky for my needs, and I know from experience that revolvers are not as malfunction-proof as some would believe. Mainly, I don't like the size efficiency. I could buy a PM9, but they are not cheap and I have heard just about as many complaints regarding their reliability as I have heard about the P3, and Kahr does not have as good a warranty. I could buy the MK9. It has the reliability issue down, but weighs far more than I want, and still costs 2 1/2 times what the KT costs.
Why not just buy the P3 and experiment? I've done that, but lately I keep thinking about what I recently heard - the P3at works great right up until they don't.
So my questions remains...is the P3at a reliable and durable gun or an exercise in wishful thinking.
Moonshot