Kel-tec P3AT feeding issues

S

samsmix

New member
A few years ago I purchased a P3AT. It has a few peculiar quirks that I cannot quite seem to overcome.

1. In recoil the bottom of the feed ramp hits the second round in the magazine so violently that it will knock a significant crease even in a FMJ nose.


2. I just cannot seem to get it to feed HPs, and even Flat Point FMJs are balky. I even tried PowRball in an attempt at finding something with safer in public than ball ammo, but to no effect. I have run 90 & 95 Cr ball successfully, as well as 115gr cast bullets (I wonder how stow those were?), but just can't make myself wat to CCW the darned thing.

Help! My 9mm Short has become a .22 Fat!
 
I stick to fmj with mine and never have a problem. With 380 I am looking for penetration rather than expansion.
 
I think your best bet is to go over to the the Kel Tec forum and learn how to do the "fluff and buff" or sell it and buy a Ruger.
 
#1 is pointing to a worn mag catch. Mag is sitting low. Easy way to tell is if there is a gap between the mag's base plate and the bottom of the mag well.

#2 can be solved with the infamous fluff/buff. I personally just stick with FMJ. Also, #1's fix may fix #2.
 
And if all else fails, then contact Kel-Tec. I had a couple minor problems and they responded quickly.
 
Thank you all for the advice. I can appreciate the idea of running ball to get more penetration, but when we are talking 30-40 inches worth depending on the load, I feel it is not a great idea. Some folks say "people make too big of a deal about overpenetration", but what those people are doing in my honest opinion is being cavalier about gun safety. As a "good guy" I will accept a little added risk to make sure that only the bad guys catch one of my bullets. If that means I only get 8" penetration so be it. HOWEVER there are .380 loads that do penetrate 11" in clothed gel, and IMO that will do....if the gun will feed it.

I DO like the "sell it and biy an LCP" approach. It was all I could afford when I needed a micro pistol, but the Ruger seems to be of much higher quality.

The Diamondback DB9 demands serious consideration. Virtually the same size, and in 9mm to boot.
 
First things first, thank you all again for the suggestions. It has been so long since I owned a cheap auto, I had forgotten about tricks like polishing the feed ramp & any tooling marks. I'm going to give the "Fluff & Buff" a go and let you guys know how it worked out..
 
I would suggest sticking with ball ammo. HPs will not give you the penetration power you'll need with a such a low velocity round. And HPs are known to snag on all kinds of semi autos. That's one of the reasons Hornady developed the polymer plug to fill in the HP. Also, be careful not to get oil onto the feed ramp. You need friction there so the extractor can grab on and eject the casing.
 
samsmix,

I have the same gun. It has the same two problems.

It has nothing to do with a worn-this or worn-that or such-and-such spring. It's the way the gun is (or was) new, out of the box. Some of this may have been fixed in later generations. Irrelevant to you and me.

Re the "crease" in FMJ from the feed ramp: out of curiosity, I fired a number of rounds into the sand, and recovered the bullets. Yep, all with a little "smiley" crease from the feed ramp. Not exactly the thing to give me confidence in the gun feeding properly in a real-life need-it-now situation, you know?

Re hollow points: forget it. Stick with FMJ. Sorry! But seriously, avoiding the significantly increased risk of feeding problems waaaaay outweighs any potential increase in effectiveness you'd get in going to HP.

If you find out anything more elsewhere, please let me know, I'd appreciate it. Personally, sorry to say, I've relegated this gun to "junk" status in my collection. I got it for hiking, and switched to a scandium-framed S&W revolver instead, for that purpose. Much better gun.

Regards,
MrEntropy
 
Nice to know the smileys can be fixed (thanks), but anything that requires me to take a dremel tool to a new gun says "poor engineering" to me.
 
I sold mine. Problem solved. Replaced it with a Kahr CM9 which is nearly as concealable and a better pistol in every way. At least to me.
 
I've had my P3AT for six years now, and have fed at least 18 different types of ammo through it, both HP and FMJ, without any problem.

It's completely stock and no work was done to it.
 
"...Nice to know the smileys can be fixed (thanks), but anything that requires me to take a dremel tool to a new gun says "poor engineering" to me..."

It was a problem in earlier P3AT's, but reportedly is not a problem anymore.
If you don't want to fix it, don't.
KelTec would be glad to take a look at it for you.
 
Still more info...

On HPs vs Ball, I'm interested in HPs (even poly-capped ones) ONLY if I can make them work reliably. Currently it's being carried with 115gr cast bullets (ball profile) or 95gr ball. Reliability is king of handgun traits in my book as well. As to penetration, well that's my choice and I figure 11" will do. Should it plug up with fibers and penetrate like ball, so be it; There will be another one on its way shortly.

Sounds like the DB9 is out. Not the first time I've heard to avoid them, and I don't want to trade o e headache for another.

Smiley Faces: it would seem to me that striking the nose of a HP would cause more issues than the resilient tip of ball ammo, SO while I'm doing the Fluff & Buff perhaps I'll look up the cure for the smiley faces as well. Seems like this could be the root of both problems.

IF this were not a $200 pistol, I would be royally upset at having to do all of this. From Kahr, Glock, even Ruger I would expect better. But I own this one and it hits what I shoot at (as much as a pocket pistol with dismal sights is going to) so I'll see if I can make it work. It's not like I'm going to decrease the value.
 
Last edited:
The Ruger LCP is no better "quality" than the P3AT. They made it heavier-unnecessary, but some people equate heavy with quality. The outer finish may be a little more refined. Otherwise the guns are the same.
If your Keltec has problems, send it to the factory and they'll make it right.
 
Thank you Bill, I meant to cover that in my last reply. If the newer guns are running with fewer issues, it DOES sound as if KelTec has a handle on the proble.. perhaps I will start there.
 
It was a problem in earlier P3AT's, but reportedly is not a problem anymore.
If you don't want to fix it, don't.
KelTec would be glad to take a look at it for you.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, and it's not fair of me to compare it to a completely different gun that costs 2-3x as much.

On the other hand, it really is beyond me how they could have failed to catch this problem with the first gen. Unless, that is, they were under pressure to get product shipping and book revenue to satisfy their debt/equity holders... of which I know absolutely nothing, so I'm totally guessing, but still. It's a pretty glaring defect.

Of course, especially when you're pushing the limits of what's possible, there's no way you can deal with the corner cases of ammo pressure / internal ballistics etc. But, I have yet to find ammo that *doesn't* get little smileys.

Tell you what, I'll ask them to fix it for me, and report back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top