Taurus 709 Slim vs. Kel-Tec PF-9???

[t_dickinson]

I'm going to buy one of these for a CCW and have researched them extensively but can't find a head to head. Looking for first hand experience with BOTH.

With 9mm being more readily available I'm likely to get more practice so my mind is made up on these models.

I'm 6' 175 pretty athletic (no belly; v-shaped torso) so I need this weapon to be concealable on a supertuck IWBH. Trying to say I'm thin with limited ability to hide a gun. I'm set on the holster.

I hear the Taurus has lighter felt recoul and a better trigger but the Kel-tec is slightly thinner. Recoil is a slight issue because I'd like to get one for my wife if she'll shoot mine. Not sure about reliability. Don't care about finish. Also don't care about what's available; I'll order if I have to. Seems to be lots of info on the Kel-Tec but lacking on the Taurus.

Any good info or recommendations within the above paramiters if very much appreciated. I ALREADY SEARCHED (not speel chechd)

 

[harmon rabb]

might i direct you to the recent comparison thread i posted on this very topic, as i own both? i include comparison pics too

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=527186

p.s. if recoil is a concern, there is NO contest. pt709. it's actually comfortable to shoot. the pf-9 is not.

 

[gofastman]

^ I own the PF9, and while I could totaly see the 709 being more comfortable to shoot, the PF9 isn't painful to shoot at all like some people make it out to be, I shoot 100 rounds out of the thing at every range session without issue.

I am very happy with my PF9, I carry it in my pocket all the time now and it really seems to disappear, that said, its about as big as I would go with a pocket gun.

I also carry it IWB when I run with my basketball style shorts on, no problem there.

If you are ONLY going to use it with an IWB holster, Id seriously consider the 709, but I don't think I'd carry it around in my pocket.

I really wish I had the oprotunity to shoot a 709 just for comparison, but like I said, Im very happy with the PF9.

I had some issues with my PF9 initialy, but they were my fault:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=522350

 

[swmp9jrm]

I own a 709 and my brother owns a PF-9. I've put a good number of rounds through his PF-9, and my opinion is that it is an evil little gun. Compared to my 709, I am not NEARLY as accurate with his PF-9, and I do think it is punishing to shoot. This past weekend, another of the brothers shot the PF-9 and had the same opinion. The brother who owns the PF-9 loves it. I wouldn't have it. What you really need to do is shoot both to see which one suits you best. From a technical standpoint, I think they are both good guns - it just depends on how it suits you individually.

 

[EdLaver]

I have a Slim and it just feels better to me. The pf-9 feels cheap and the one I did shoot, the magazine kept falling out.

 

[harmon rabb]

^ I own the PF9, and while I could totaly see the 709 being more comfortable to shoot, the PF9 isn't painful to shoot at all like some people make it out to be, I shoot 100 rounds out of the thing at every range session without issue.

I am very happy with my PF9, I carry it in my pocket all the time now and it really seems to disappear, that said, its about as big as I would go with a pocket gun.

I also carry it IWB when I run with my basketball style shorts on, no problem there.

If you are ONLY going to use it with an IWB holster, Id seriously consider the 709, but I don't think I'd carry it around in my pocket.

I really wish I had the oprotunity to shoot a 709 just for comparison, but like I said, Im very happy with the PF9.

the PF-9 is not painful to shoot. anyone who says so is a whiner. i would certainly not call it comfortable to shoot, however. the 709 on the other hand, is comfortable to shoot. i notice a big difference going right from one to the other.

with respect to your pocket / iwb comment, if a pocket will hold the pf-9, it'll hold the 709. check out the comparison pics in the thread i linked to earlier. they're almost identical in size.

 

[Ben86]

I had the same consideration to make a few months ago. I went with the T709. What really sold me is the trigger, it has a very good trigger. The SA trigger is not too long or short, pretty light and has the one of the cleanest breaks I've ever felt. The double action trigger isn't to bad either, but doesn't really matter because it will most likely never be used. The gun also seemed to be of better quality, way better fit and finish. The only thing I don't like is that it was made in Brazil and Brazil's politics irritate me (their support for Iran for instance). Oh well, I digress.

 

[swmp9jrm]

the PF-9 is not painful to shoot. anyone who says so is a whiner.

Not sure anyone on THIS thread said the PF-9 is painful - I did say it is punishing. If you shoot a hundred rounds through the PF-9 at one crack, I can guarantee that you will be a little worse for wear. It is NOT a range gun. The 709 is much more comfortable to shoot, and that allows me to practice as much as I want with it. More practice = better confidence as a carry gun. No whining here.

 

[harmon rabb]

Not sure anyone on THIS thread said the PF-9 is painful - I did say it is punishing. If you shoot a hundred rounds through the PF-9 at one crack, I can guarantee that you will be a little worse for wear. It is NOT a range gun.

I agree with you 100%.