I have the newish Ruger version in 40sw. Handled the 2000's and did not care for the feel. The Ruger eats everything you feed it, solid, but ugly as F#@%! It goes good with my Glock G22 and 23.

quote:

Originally posted by mike28w:
…Didn't like the sights but if you put on a Red Dot , then you couldn't completely fold it.

Never shot the ruger so No Comment.

But I like the little keltec for what it is…great backpack truck gun that uses the same mags as your secondary pistol (Glock 17/19 for me). M-Carbo makes a gob of accessories for it and even a completely upgraded model using their aftermarket parts with the Keltec warranty still 100% intact.

https://www.mcarbo.com/kel-tec...-2-9mm-for-sale.aspx

I bought the basic model and added a few goodies. Shoots much smoother and comfortably though don’t let me sell it too hard…it’ll never be as comfortable as a traditional stock.

M-Carbo also makes a flip away mount for your optic so you can flip it out of the way allowing you to completely fold the gun as advertised.

https://www.mcarbo.com/kel-tec...000-optic-mount.aspx

quote:

Originally posted by taco68:
I have the newish Ruger version in 40sw. Handled the 2000's and did not care for the feel. The Ruger eats everything you feed it, solid, but ugly as F#@%! It goes good with my Glock G22 and 23.

How is the recoil on the .40 version of the Ruger? I am curious since both it and the 9mm version are blow back actions which usually have more recoil. I have shot the PC9 and found it slightly harsher than I expected for a 9mm, but not objectionable. I am debating between the .40 and the 9mm. The .40's are hard to find in this area. Thanks.

I’d opt for the Ruger PC. My only regret was I didn’t get one in 40sw…

Re: recoil of the 9mm KT Sub2000

It's very light, not sure how they did that with blowback that tends to have more recoil, maybe the heavy bolt?

It's easily 1/2 to 2/3 the recoil of shooting an AR in .223/5.56 which to me feels like I'm shooting a toy compared to what I grew up shooting: 30-06 and .35 Rem

Also worth mentioning is a Kriss Vector carbine.

While it doesn't fold neatly like the KelTec, it uses Glock magazines as well.

I really like my Sub 2000. I don’t usually like keltec but this is a sweet little gun. In this niche I prefer it to the Ruger. There is takedown and then there is folding. Folding is better. Use a red dot. Just get a QD mount and accept that it might not be a sniper gun. I never confused it for that anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
The Ruger was reliable, but I can't say that I fell in love with it. It is heavy for what it is, and has more recoil impulse than one would expect from a 9mm rifle.

I've had a smattering of the PCC's now. In order from least, to most, felt-reoil impulse: The AR patter Foxtrot Mike 9 5.5", the Extar EP9, CZ Scorpion...yes the heaviest one in the RUger. I know, it did't make sense to me, either. Between weight, recoil, and the 'Giant 10/22" feel, that got sold first, then the Scorp, then the FM...

Now, the Keltec Gen II is probably right there with the Extar. Besides being light, fun and easy to shoot, there is that kewl fold-up feature. However, IF you shoot portside, as I do with longarms, you will get gassed in the face. It's disconcerting enough to take the 'fun' out of it, for ME. I have a local kydex artisan farting with it to see about a snap-on, screw-on solution.