I did a comparison of both as I owned both. They are very similarAnybody have experience comparing these two?
Same experiance, the Kel Tec PF-9 was a jam o matic with the same ammo that works fine in my Ruger LC9. I never had a problem yet with my Ruger LC9 and I was able to shoot it with much more accuracy also than the Kel Tec. I know the Kel Tec is cheaper but you do get what you pay for and even the LC9 prices are lower now than when first introduced. I paid less than $300 for mine, which to me is a bargin for something that works great. The Ruger is much more comfortable to shoot than the Kel Tec for me, as I usually shoot 50 to 100 rounds at a time. Both about the same size, but the Ruger seems much better built.I owned a PF9 will never own another one or any Kel-Tec very cheap, jammed all the time . I now own and carry a LC9 great little gun . Around 1000 rounds with no problems at all. I have had it almost two years now, carry it every day.
Not your everyday target gun but it works for what it was made for , a carry gun ...
You and me both. I wish they would make a non California LC9 built similar to the LCP. My PF-9 has never had a hiccup so I'll stick with it, but I did add an XDs into my stable and it's a pleasure to shoot.Keltecs are hit and miss quality wise. Mine was fine, I know others that couldn't get theirs to work right. That right there scared me away from carrying it as something to rest my life on when possibly needed. I wish Ruger would make the LC9 without all the lawyered up safety garbage. It would be perfect.