Keltec PF9 or S&W 642 for IWB?

"The KT just doesnt feel like a quality gun to me."
This translates to "It's not heavy."
Heavy does not mean quality. Keltecs were specifically designed to be extremely light weight weapons. Modern materials and manufacturing methods have allowed makers to make good guns that are no longer heavy. This is a good thing if you carry a gun.
 
"How long have you owned them and how many rounds have you shot through them?"

The .32 I have had for several years and have fired several hundred rounds out of it; the PF9 for about six months with about two hundred rounds. And I am not a neophyte to firearms, I've been shooting for the last thirty years or so and generally carry a Kimber .45 unless it's shorts weather; then it's one or both of the KTs.
 
For IWB you can just as easily carry a more serious defensive weapon like a Glock 26/27, M&P Compact, XD compact, etc
Click to expand...

I echo this thought precisely. The Kel-Tec and 642 are both pocket pistols so that, if you're going to go to the trouble of carrying IWB, you may as well carry something that is more serious. I love my 642 and Kel-Tec P40 to death, with the former being my everyday strong side pocket gun. But for IWB I reach for a compact or full size pistol. :D

I'd just add, in the spirit of the OP, that if I had to choose between the 642 and Kel-Tec I'd unquestionably choose the 642. I've owned Kel-Tecs, own one now, and found them to be plenty reliable. The 642 is however more accurate, lighter, and I do think more reliable than the pocket autos. YMMV...
 
Not sure about the Kel-Tec, but I do own a S&W 637. From a CCW standpoint the snub nose works very well. While I usually carry OWB, I have carried the snub IWB and it works very well. The cylinder is a little bulky, but it really isn't an issue. Either of those two choices should work IWB for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top