TexasCHLforum.com

LCP = Lightweight Compact Pistol

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/ ... ype=Pistol

http://www.downrange.tv/shotshow2008/?p=11

If it proves reliable, this is going to really sell.

Mike1951 wrote: If it proves reliable, this is going to really sell.

I would certainly agree. It it proves as reliable as my P3AT, I will most likely buy one once they become easily available (might take a year or two). Don't really need one, but having a BUG for the BUG is a good enough reason for me.....

PhilR.

That looks nice. I'll trade my keltec for a ruger any day.

I see they have all of the Brady locking garbage. My KTs don't.

Anygun

anygunanywhere wrote:I see they have all of the Brady locking garbage. My KTs don't.

I must be overlooking something. I see no internal lock. It just comes with a padlock.

Looks alot like a p3-at with a slide lock. Daddy likes!

It looks like it may be a bit wider and a bit taller. Perhaps I'll be able to get two fingers on this one.

I found the exploded parts view and it looks identical to the Kel-Tec. With a little luck the fit and finish will be better and there will be fewer problems out of the box.

Tom

Mike1951 wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:I see they have all of the Brady locking garbage. My KTs don't.

I must be overlooking something. I see no internal lock. It just comes with a padlock.

I'm not doing very well today. Mike1951 is shooting me full of holes.

I surrender.

Anygun

I like a-lot. I may get that to replace my P-3AT =). They must have an agreement or something kel-tec. That looks like an upgraded copy of the kel-tec............

Now if they can just copy the PF-9 and make a better version of it.......

Never thought about buying a ruger pistol (except 22lr) until now.

While it shares some features with the KT, it also has some significant differences. Over at KTOG.org, they have side-by-side exploded diagrams. Some parts are almost identical, but others are very different.

Sweeeeet.

I don't think I'll get one, but who knows.

I can't make myself invest in holsters for my .380s as long as I have 9x19 pistols that are as small or smaller.

I had fired a KT once and really didn't enjoy it enough to be useful with it.

KBCraig wrote:While it shares some features with the KT, it also has some significant differences. Over at KTOG.org, they have side-by-side exploded diagrams. Some parts are almost identical, but others are very different.

I studied those charts and can't find too many differences. They exploded it differently but when you compare the majority of the parts they are very close. Perhaps KT has an agreement with them. I don't know much about copyright laws. If they can control the quality and fit & finish they should have a hit at that price point.

Tom

Quote: "I don't know much about copyright laws."

Patents, if such exist by Kel-Tec, are probably stronger. But, I doubt Ruger would be going forward in this manner if there was a problem with possible litigation. And if there was litigation, Ruger likely in a much better financial position to duke it out ...

Yep, if the little gun proves to be reliable, Ruger probably has a winner there. But I'd rather see one in 9mm - where Kahr could have some more legitimate competition.

Greybeard wrote:Patents, if such exist by Kel-Tec, are probably stronger. But, I doubt Ruger would be going forward in this manner if there was a problem with possible litigation. And if there was litigation, Ruger likely in a much better financial position to duke it out ...

Wrong choice of words again. I have to stop posting so early in the morning! I agree with you that Ruger most likely did their research and has deeper pockets in case Kel Tec files.

I'l looking forward to getting my hands on one!

Tom

Did Ruger clone the KelTec P-3AT under license, or is this an original design?

The .380 being of rather low velocity with questionable expansion characteristics, at least from a 2.5 inch barrel, I would have much rather seen Ruger introduce a small scale semi-auto for it's new personal defense .327 round.