Ruger LCP 380 auto

[351 WINCHESTER]

What ruger did was take a problematic kel tec and fix it's weaknesses. K/T has had real issues with their p3at since it's introduction, tried to fix the problems, but they never went away. Funny, but their p32's are generally pretty relaible, but have had their share of problems too.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

I might possibly buy the Ruger---won't touch a Kel-crap with a 10ft pole.

Maybe in a year or so---not going to be one of Ruger's beta testers.

 

[Liberty4Ever]

I saw diagrams of the internals somewhere, but I don't remember where. As I remember it, the Ruger is quite different on the inside.

Here is the diagram of the LCP.



Here's the Kel-Tec P-3AT.



If that isn't enough, here's the LCP with all of the P-3AT part numbers superimposed so you can compare for yourself.



Maybe you'd like to tell me where the parts are that are "quite different on the inside"? Inside, it's the same exact pistol. It's such a blatant ripoff that I wouldn't be surprised if the parts were interchangeable.

 

[BlkHawk73]

It's such a blatant ripoff that I wouldn't be surprised if the parts were interchangeable.

And this matters how? It's different than all the 1911 clones in which way? How 'but all the SAA clones? AR's?

just don't get all the finger pointing on this new Ruger when sooo many other manufacturers copy and clone a LOT of other models and nobody bats an eye.

 

[pistol-packin-preacher]

So, whatcha reckon the actual retail price will be on this little gem - $275 or so?

I am pre-purchasing from a local GS for $279.00

If I was in the market for a pocket .380, I'd wait a few weeks for the Kahr .380 that's coming,

I have searched for a news release or article verifying this... where did you hear/see this?

 

[Pa.Bill]

On Ruger site the recommended price was $330...............
And, I did like the superimposed post.

~BEST~

 

[TimboKhan]

I saw diagrams of the internals somewhere, but I don't remember where. As I remember it, the Ruger is quite different on the inside.

Same here. Liberty, here is where they differ:

For starters, the Kel-Tec has 33 parts. The Ruger, 36. This immediately indicates that it is not the "same exact pistol".

Minor differences would be in how the frame and slide are molded and the magazine. Very, very minor, but they are different.

The Kel-Tec has no part #184, despite it being labeled so on the Ruger/Kel-Tec "overlay" picture. This is also the case with Part # 174. These are both instances where the author of the picture should have red starred it, and these two parts and the existing "red star part" make up the additional 3 pieces.

Part #273 is different between the two guns.

Part #182 is different between the two guns.

Part #284 are different, although probably I am splitting hairs with that one.

Parts 252, 253, 254 are similar, but it appears that they are assembled different than on the Keltec, accounting for the holes in 252 and 254 that the corresponding Kel-Tec parts do not have. If they are, in fact, assembled differently, this is a legitimate difference between the guns, in my opinion.

And there you go. I think I got everything, but I started going crosseyed comparing the two! Ruger obviously took a considerable amount of liberty with the Kel-Tec design. I just don't think it is fair to say it is an exact copy, because it isn't.

 

[tinygnat219]

Well, I already have my pocket pistol with the P3AT. It fills its niche rather well. Having seen Ruger's offerings at SHOT Show this year, I judge their products to be: Vanilla.
Nice to have, but nothing special.

 

[-v-]

Eh, Ruger will push this thing out the door, it'll instantly start having similar/same issues that all micro-scale pistols have that use a tilt-locking breach, and customers will ask themselves, is $50 more really worth having the same gun as a kel-tec but with Ruger on it?

I think a lot of the P-3AT's issues really are endemic to the design of the mechanism and action, and fixing a few parts here and there might somewhat improve reliability, but don't expect great leaps and bounds in reliability.

 

[camper]

I'll stick with my new NAA 380 Guardian. 100% reliable and one of the last ones made using the Khar frame. I'll relook the LCP in a year or so.

 

[Liberty4Ever]

And this matters how? It's different than all the 1911 clones in which way? How 'but all the SAA clones? AR's?

The 1911 was adopted by the US Army in... 1911. John Moses Browning died in 1926.

The SAA was introduced in 1873!

ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt in 1959.

The Kel-Tec P-3AT was introduced at the 2004 SHOT Show, and George Kellgren is still very much alive.

You honestly don't see any difference in copying a hundred year old classic design and ripping off a three year old current production design?!?



TimboKhan,

We probably aren't going to agree on this subject, and in fact, it looks like most people in this thread don't seem to have any moral issues with such a blatant ripoff of a competing product, but many of the minor differences you mention are not differences at all. Maybe just different angles or different artistic representations. I won't go through them all one at a time, but as an example, part 273 is a torsion spring in both designs. If there is any difference at all in these two parts, I think it's only a slight difference.

There are a few actual differences on the outside. The Ruger obviously has a different shape to the frame, although an overlay of the two images shows almost no actual difference in the outside shape, with the only significant difference being the trigger guard. Ruger added a manual slide stop and they used a more conventional extractor. Otherwise... it's the same gun. The differences are VERY minor, and certainly are not enough to justify calling this a different pistol. There are a lot more significant differences between the Generation 1 and Generation 2 Kel-Tec P-3ATs. At best, the LCP is a slightly different version of the P-3AT.

If someone believes it's OK to rip off a competitor's three year old design, I can't agree but I can't really argue with that. But nobody can look at these two pistols and say that Ruger didn't directly copy the Kel-Tec P-3AT, not in the sense of a similar gun with a different design, but actually measuring each part and making a clone. If anyone believes that, they should follow the directions on the can and use the Gunscrubber outside or in a well ventilated area, because they've killed some brain cells.

 

[jon_in_wv]

This may be nitpicking but the P3AT is hardly a three year old design. It is for all purposes a beefed up and recalibered P32. Just making it a 380 doesn't make it a new design. The point being then the design was introduced somewhere around 1995. That makes it a 12 year old design. I'm sure all patents are expired and its prefectly resonable to allow competition. Where you out there stomping your feet when every one copied Para-Ordnance and started making double stack 1911s? Ted Szabo was alive when everone copied his design. JMB may have been dead but Colt was still actively producing 1911s. If its foul for Ruger to make a version of the P3AT then it was foul for Kimber, Springfield, and the rest to make them also. JMB didn't own Colt so whether he was alive or not is irrelevant.

 

[CPshooter]

I can care less if Ruger ripped it off or not. If they didn't have the rights to do so then Kel-Tec will have to deal with it, not me. I'm just the consumer. I'm comparing what will give me more value for my buck. Ethics are obviously what the controversy is about, and I can see where some of you are coming from, but in the end it all boils down to what you are going to spend your hard earned money on and what you think is a better deal for your money.

On that note, the new Ruger 380 looks good. It has what the P3AT lacks. If there was a market for it, which there definitely is, then Ruger made a smart move. By the way, I usually don't like Ruger products.. I'd take a S&W revolver over a Ruger any day of the week and I'd never think about buying a full-size Ruger auto. I've always wanted a quality .380 pocket pistol for a decent price, and the fit and finish of the Kel-Tecs just didn't cut it for me. This Ruger looks perfect though. I just hope it works as good as it looks.

The Kahr .380 is news to me. I'm definitely going to wait for this little guy before I get the Ruger. If I'm not impressed, then Ruger LCP it is.

 

[KelTecian]

Yeah...not the same...

Kel Tec will still have better customer service... ;-P

IMHO Ruger has obviously taken the Kel Tec design and improved on it with better manufacturing techniques, better quality materials, and probably better overall engineering through extensive testing.

Ruger is a big boy when it comes to making guns, whereas Kel Tec is only around because they were able to find a niche and fill it quickly and cheaply.

It looks like a way better overall product...and only for a couple becks more. I will take it and enjoy it.






BTW...how the heck did we start comparing the so-so P3AT design to the wonderful 1911?
come on people... you know I love ya, but come on...

 

[Bullet]

I thought the difference between the Kel-Tec P-3AT and the new Ruger LCP was the Ruger LCP’s are supposed to work.

http://www.ruger.com/LCP/index.html


.

 

[TimboKhan]

Liberty,

You know, I am aware that they are minor differences, and I certainly am aware that it is pretty much the same thing. I have a P3AT myself! My only point was to show that there are different parts, and there are.

Philosophically, I don't necessarily mind companies taking designs from other companies, provided that patent has run out and it is done legally. In this case, my guess is that there wasn't a patent on the P3AT, because as mentioned already, the P32 has been around 12 years now.

Overall, this might sound morally ambigous, but there are zillions of examples of competitors taking existing designs and improving on them. I can't say Ruger has improved on the P3AT for certain, but I know the slide stop is an improvement, and I will be shocked if the extractor on the LCP vs. the extractor on my 3rd gen P3AT doesn't end up being a real improvement.

Using guitars as an example of companies taking designs and pushing them forward, I give you the Fender Stratocaster. To make a long story short, Fender had been bought out by CBS, quality went in the crapper in the 70's. Ibanez (among other companies) started making Fender (and Gibson) copies that were of a higher quality. Stevie Ray Vaughn actually played a Tokai copy of a Strat for a pretty long time! Anyway, eventually Fender realized that the Japanese were building a better product, so while they retooled in order to compete, they literally made all of their Strats in Japan for a year (if memory serves, this was 84 or 85). For some time now, Fender has been back and better than ever, and Ibanez (among other Japanese companies) make their own highly regarded products as well. My point here is that far from ruining one product, they pushed to make it better, and we ended up with many good products. Will this be the case with Kel-Tec and Ruger? Who knows? We are going to find out though!

 

[cornman]

9mm version coming?

 

[KelTecian]

Ruger will have a PF-9 out shortly i'm sure lol

 

[StrikeFire83]

For everyone screaming about "morality" and whatnot, I just think that whole argument is a little silly. This is the cutthroat world of business. If Georgie Porgie didn't patent his design, as has already been mentioned, then he paved the way for a competitor to come along and appropriate his design. There's no boo-hooing in business. If Ruger makes a their own version of the P3AT, but has across the board better reliability in a stronger design with extra features, then I say bravo to them for offering us a better product.

I own a completely reliable P-3AT, which has near on 500 hollow points through it with narry a malfunction. It is an adequate combat firearm for its intended purpose. However, I realize that I may be in the minority, and that many people have had to tinker with their guns or send them back to the factory (more than once) to get them to function properly. If that had been the case with mine, I would have gotten rid of it awhile ago.

There are some things that need to be 100% or very near it, and one of those is a defensive handgun. The "fluff and buff" or more than a SINGLE trip to the factory for a potentially lifesaving cc gun is simply unacceptable to most people, myself included.

I cant believe I have to say this on The High Road, but competition is good for us, the consumer. All of this boo-hoo finger pointing is stupid and irrelevant. If Ruger builds the better mousetrap and the originator was too stupid to patent their innovation, then Ruger deserves the spoils.

However, I got a good gun, and I'll carry/shoot it until it proves itself otherwise.

 

[Animal Mother]

I hope Kel-Tec sues the pants off of Ruger. This will probably end up like the Glock vs. S&W Sigma fiasco.

I do wonder how Ruger is going to fit the entire instruction manual on the slide, I'm sure they'll probably have to change the font size.

 

[ABBOBERG]

If I invented something, and did not to patent it, I would have no one but myself to blame if another company started producing something VERY similar. Enough said.

Kellgren did indeed patent the Grendel, but the patent has long expired. Then there's the Skyy....

 

[HLG]

Liberty,
Where did you get the info about a Kahr 380 being out in a few weeks?

 

[tblt]

Looks like a kel tec priced like a kel tec

 

[TimboKhan]

If that had been the case with mine, I would have gotten rid of it awhile ago.

Well, amen to that. I haven't had any problems with my Kel-Tec either, but I would be considerably less than patient with it if I had.

I hope Kel-Tec sues the pants off of Ruger. This will probably end up like the Glock vs. S&W Sigma fiasco.

I do wonder how Ruger is going to fit the entire instruction manual on the slide, I'm sure they'll probably have to change the font size.

I don't think so. I seriously doubt that Ruger went into this thinking that they were going to fool any of us, let alone Kel-Tec. I mean, maybe, but it just doesn't seem likely.

As far as the font size thing, thats probably closer to the truth that you might imagine. Every looked at an SR9? The instruction manual (which, by the way, never bothered me a bit) is there, but in a much, much smaller font.

 

[lanternlad1]

Why do people care if Ruger ripped off the P3-at design? Seriously. If any of you who whine about this are not George Kellgren, then give it a rest. Its not like it effects your lives a bit. Skyy Firearms ripped off the P11, and Kellgren's only comment was "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.". If there was a patent, I'm betting it expired. I don't think either Kel-Tec or Ruger are worried about it, so neither should we.