Bersa Thunder or Kel Tec P3-AT

[SAG0282]

Please, back off the rhetoric.

It's hardly rhetoric...the thread solicited advice about two different pistols, and I'm giving it. KelTecs just arent universally reliable...put aside your brand-loyalty and deal with it. As far as the size, that's already been dealt with. I conceded back then that the KT is handier. But it's more then just size...the Bersa is inexpensive while remaining reliable. Now find a 9mm that does that while remaining nice and small.

 

[ugaarguy]

KelTecs just arent universally reliable...put aside your brand-loyalty and deal with it.

Nothing is universally reliable. I'm defending Kel-Tec because you're making it sound like they're generally unreliable. I did link the poll I posted here that tells it like it is.

But it's more then just size...the Bersa is inexpensive while remaining reliable. Now find a 9mm that does that while remaining nice and small.

Well there's Kel-Tec's own P-11, but I don't care for it's loong & heavy DA trigger. However, if you download the current CDNN catalog on p.50 you'll find the 3.5" bbl, .40 S&W chambered, single stack 8 rd magazine S&W 4043 for $260 in good to very good condition. The same pistols can be had in VG to EX cond. for an extra $20. I'm sure you could find a similar S&W in 9mm on the used / police trade-in market for a similar price.

 

[SAG0282]

I'm not making it sound like they're GENERALLY unreliable....that meaning that that is the trend. What I am saying is that it's a crapshoot...some owners have them run like a Timex, others eventually shop them off after lots of trouble. Couple that with the fact they just dont have the shootability that the Bersa does and I just dont want it. Again, I said I understood why people like them...I'm not bashing the owners. I just wont own one.

As far as the S&W....it's a bulkier pistol still. They're great guns, and though smaller then my SIG Pro if I was in that size range I'd just forego it and carry the SIG. The size savings just wouldnt be there. The Bersa is a good size...not a pocket pistol, but not with pocket pistol shooting characterisics either.

 

[Mad Chemist]

I've owned and carried a Bersa Thunder and played with a Keltec. The Bersa was a nice gun for the money but I prefer my S&W 642.

 

[ugaarguy]

SAG I understand your reasons for not wanting a Kel-Tec, however their reliability is not the "crapshoot" you call it. Go back and look at the poll I linked and look at the 2nd Gen P3AT percentages. 77% out of the box reliability, 11% more were reliable with a fluff & buff. Another 2 of 36, or 5.5% of 2nd gen responses said their P3ATs were unreliable even after a trip to the factory. The balance, the other 5.5% were reliable after a trip back to the factory. I think those are pretty good numbers for such a small sample size. Again, I extensively test fire any gun before relying on it, so I'll catch any problems if they're there before I trust my life to it.

Further, just as you won't carry a Kel-Tec because it isn't as shootable I wouldn't carry a Bersa in .380 because that dictates belt carry. When we throw belt carry into the equation we open up the ability to just as easily carry and conceal pistols like the S&W I cited. Caveat, if I suffered a hand/wrist/arm injury and needed a softer shooting pistol I'd look at the .380 Bersa, along with the CZ-82/83 pistols for their shootability (though I'd likely just load my M66 snubbie with .38s and call it good).

 

[SAG0282]

Lol I think in the end we're just respectfully agreeing to disagree. The results of the poll generally have not matched what I've heard from other boards and from real-world shooters but hey, we know how polls can work. Your KT works great for you and the Bersa works for me so it's all good.

 

[ugaarguy]

Lol I think in the end we're just respectfully agreeing to disagree.

Agreed

To our original poster, I apologize for the thread drift. I guess it comes down to if you want a small gun to carry on your belt, or a smaller gun to carry in your pocket.

 

[jeepmor]

I like the KT's size, but I like the Kahr PM40's size to power ratio even better.

I'd have the same dilemma, but it would be a Keltec PF9 or Kahr PM40. I'd probably pick the Kahr.

But for this debate, it's the KT P3AT purely on its smaller stature and easier concealability.

 

[Citadel99]

I just picked up a Kel Tec this weekend so I guess that puts me on the Kdl Tec side of the equation...

Mark

 

[gotime242]

Im trading in my besra for a P-3AT. I dont fully trust my bersa as it does jam every now and again...so its not perfect. Plus, its a lot bigger/heavier than i originally thought, and i dont carry it as much as i would like to because of it.

I know if i get the P-3AT i will at least be able to have it on me almost at all times.

 

[Clipper]

Your choices shouldn't be between .380s...If you're contemplating the Bersa, you should simply go to a KT P-11. The issue should be size as relates to concealibility. There's no way I'd choose the Bersa, simply because I can easily carry a 9mm at that size instead of a .380. Either way, the KT will be excellent. My wife & I have G1 .380s, and they're great pistols. BTW, I've hit small water bottles at 25 yards with mine, and my wife holds 4" DTs @ 10 yards with hers... They're accurate enough.

 

[kokapelli]

My opinion is not based on what I may have read.

I own a Bersa and three P-3AT pistols.

Both of my first generation and my second generation P-3ATs go bang every time I pull the triggers.

If I had to get rid of the Bersa or a P-3AT, it would be the bersa in a heart beat.

I would rather have the P-3AT that will always be with me, than the Bersa that may or may not be with me, because it won't fit in my pocket.

 

[Lonestar]

Man some mud slinging here. I have a KT P3at and I had a Bersa .380. They are two different guns. I use the P3at for descreet concealed carry, and never had a problem with the gun. HOWEVER I don't trust Kel Tec First Generation guns. I love my 2nd generation P3at, but I would never buy a first gen. I will eventually buy a PF-9 but I'm waiting until the bugs are worked out.

The first gun I bought for my wife was a Two tone bersa Thunder .380. Great gun for the money, I cannot say that enough, but it is a little big and heavy for carry when you compare it to the Kel Tec. My wife shot my Glock 26 one day and said she liked it, and basically the Bersa got traded for another Glock 26. The Glock 27 is thicker than the bersa but close to the same dimension and weight.

If you asked me I want a gun for the range and possible CCW in .380 I would say get the Bersa. However if your saying I already carry a Glock 27 and I want something lighter and easier to conceal (especially during the summer) I say get the Kel Tec.

 

[kokapelli]

HOWEVER I don't trust Kel Tec First Generation guns. I love my 2nd generation P3at, but I would never buy a first gen.

Why?

 

[MrAcheson]

77% out of the box reliability

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but 23% unreliability out of the box is horrible by any standard of modern manufacturing. Even if all 11% did the fluff and buff just for piece of mind, the remaining 11-12% is still a huge number. One in eight people have to send their guns back to the factory. One in eight! Horrible.

That said, if you are looking for an always carry gun, you are looking for the kel-tec. The bersa really is big enough that you could be carrying your glock.

Now if I were looking for a fun range gun, I'd buy the Bersa. Even in 380 the kel-tec is so small and light that it still can punish your hand a bit. And it isn't exactly accurate past card table distance.

 

[scurtis_34471]

Just keep in mind that the Thunder .380 CC is significantly smaller and lighter than the regular Thunder .380.

 

[ugaarguy]

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but 23% unreliability out of the box is horrible by any standard of modern manufacturing. Even if all 11% did the fluff and buff just for piece of mind, the remaining 11-12% is still a huge number. One in eight people have to send their guns back to the factory. One in eight! Horrible.

Hence, I noted that it was a very small sample size - 36 responses - so it's nowhere close to scientific. I'm sure the out of the box reliability is much higher than what a tiny poll on a single gun forum would indicate. I thought it would be obvious, but apparently I over estimated the average comprehension of basic statistics.

 

[Lonestar]

Quote:
HOWEVER I don't trust Kel Tec First Generation guns. I love my 2nd generation P3at, but I would never buy a first gen.

Why?

kokapelli all you have to do is look at www.ktog.org or www.ktrange.com and see for yourself. Most first generation Kel Tec Firearms had issues. The 1st Gen P3at had MAJOR problems that were thankfully solved in the 2nd generation. When the P3at first came out, People chose the P32 over the P3at regardless of the weaker cailber, simply because the P3at was not reliable. The SU-16 has had problems with Kabooms, and after much delay the Pf-9 came out with some problems. Fluff and Buff was invented by First generation KT owners, now with the 2nd generation you don't need to F&B your kel Tec out of the box anymore.

Kel Tec make some great firearms, but their first run usually has some bugs. Once they figure those bugs out, then the 2nd gens are excellent.

 

[MrAcheson]

Actually 36 is not a bad number of samples. Lots of studies use numbers in the twenties. With 36 samples we can use basic hypothesis testing to determine that the odds of 23% failure rate actually being something more palatable (like 5%) is something like 1 in a 100. If we assume that the fluff-n-buffers were just doing that for fun, then the odds of 12% turning into 5% are 1 in 10. Still not especially good, but possible.

What was that you said about statistics?

 

[ugaarguy]

If we assume that the fluff-n-buffers were just doing that for fun, then the odds of 12% turning into 5% are 1 in 10. Still not especially good, but possible.

Well I gave Kel-Tec a call. They hit your 1 in 10 possibility. Their service dept rep didn't know exact numbers produced off hand. He was able to tell me that Kel-Tec has 5% or less service returns on all products. He said that the P3AT is right around that 5% number. While not great we must factor in that Kel-Tec is pushing the extreme for size (as we've already noted in this thread), and, more critically, weight for the caliber of firearm. Considering it's a high production for such a small company and low price it's amazing that they see 5% or under service returns. The fact that Kel-Tec stands behind their product greatly increases the value. I still don't like the small sample size of the poll, but I'll concede that it's more accurate - through data extrapolation - than I thought. Very good call on the numbers sir.

Still, I'll harp on reliability testing again. Whether it's a Kel-Tec with a 5% return rate or a S&W revolver with - I'm guessing - a .5% or less service return rate they're both machines that can fail. Either way I'll test it for reliability because 0.5% out of the box failure vs. 5.0% is of little consolation if you've got the gun that doesn't work when you need it. Prove it on the range before you carry it regardless of manufacturer.

As an intersting side note the KT rep said, shocking to me, that the PLR-16 .233 pistol is their most reliable firearm at less than 1% service return rate.

 

[kokapelli]

Lonestar, First, before you post things that can start false roomers like the KelTec 223 platform is having kabooms, you should do some research.

There has only been one known kaboom from the Keltec 223 platform and it was established that it was caused by faulty ammo.

I have been a member at the ktog board for years and yes, the early 1st gen P-3AT did have some problems just as the Kahr PM9 and many other fine pistols have.

As the production continued, those problems were corrected and 1st gen pistols became very reliable.

I have both, 1st gen and second gen P-3ATs and I carry the 1st gen, because it has, IMO a better shaped slide for point shooting and is completely and every bit as reliable as the 2nd gen.

I should also mention that I have an SU16C and IMO, think it is the best gun KelTec has made to date.

It can't be anymore reliable than it is and with it, I regularly outshoot my Son and his AR from 200 out to 300 yards.

Link about the 223 kaboom________
http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=50;action=display;num=1137550546