Closest Competition to Kel-Tec SU-16?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drakejake

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
826
Location
Nashville, TN
In terms of price and features, what is the closest competition to the folding .223 rifle made by Kel-Tec? I would like to consider some other rifle that comes with a folding stock, is small, lightweight, shoots .223, and takes standard AR-15 mags. The SU-15 sells for about $400-$550, depending on the model.

Thanks,

Drakejake
 
M-17 bullpup Bushmaster go for $650ish. Sometimes you can find the new AR-180 clones (somebody help me out with a name here) for that price. IMHO your $150 would be damn well spent if you got any Bushmaster over the Kel-Tec.
 
Depending on the place you can have a Kel Tec for less. From guy I buy my guns from, $438. CDNN $399 + shipping. Those are Alpha models... add $30-$40 for the Bravo's.

There was one review out there that said the SU was gonna replace his AR180.

In Cali, it's an SU or a Mini 14. So, that's all I really get to choose from. I chose Kel Tec.
 
Ruger Mini-14! you can find em all over used for $400 or so. The mini-14 is a much better design than the keltec. I could break those crappy plastic arms off in about 5 seconds (in fact I did almost break them off trying to get them to close while handling one at the gunshop). The keltec felt like a toy, where as a mini-14 feels more like a rifle.

The mini-14 is a great gun, the only reason they aren't accurate is when the barrel heats up after a lot of shooting. The first few shots will usually go into 2" at 100 yards. Very reliable with factory magazines too.
 
I would definately have to say the Armalite AR-180B.



The operating system is the same, it takes AR mags, runs on .223; price is about $650.00 'round in these parts, though. And no folding stock, either... but I would take the AR-180B over the SU-16 series any day. :)
 
I have an AR-180B, and definitely wouldn't trade it for an SU-16. I saw them in the $500 range at a gun show this weekend. ACE is supposed to be coming out with a folding stock for the AR-180B sometime this year.

P.S. -- there's a difference between a folding stock and a folding rifle :neener:
 
I totally disagree with 357!

My post in another thread on this page:

"Being in Cali I had this same issue. I wanted a .223, but wasn't sure about the Mini 14. I've read it's not the most accurate thing in the world, and I don't agree with Rugers "no badge, no need" policy (even though I can't have um anyway). And it's my money so I'll chose to send it to whomever I want. No matter how stupid Roland thinks it is.

That being said, I found the SU16. I had a big debate over the two. Mainly I didn't like the SU because it was all plastic and most people said it felt like a toy. Well I went to a gun shop and found that I really like the gun. It is sturdy, it's very easy/fast to shoulder, the sights are dorky but the gun seems to aim itself, it's uber light, and it's cheaper than the Mini 14. Most people that talk bad about the gun have never shot it or never even held it. They make decisions based on it being plastic. Well, polymer handguns took a lot of guff when they were first coming out. Anyway, I found my Kel Tec for $438. You just gotta find the right place. CDNN sells them for $399.

Then think about the accuracy of both guns and how they work. The SU is similar to the AR in that they are both basically gas operated bolt action rifle. From what I've read (and I've been doing a lot of reading) the firing pin assembly and bolt are very similar. The Mini has a Garand style action that is cool, but not right with the Mini 14's weak barrel. They don't like the large gas block slamming back and forth on each shot... compared to no block on the AR... and a light hollow rod on the SU. *thanks flyer.*

I've heard alot of people complain about the weight of the Kel Tec, and not being able to butstrike with it. Well, I'll never butstrike any of my plinking buddies. So that's not even an consideration. Remember what you're getting. The SU isn't a battle rifle, it's a light weight plinker used for having fun. And for the price, you really can't go wrong.

It also has some neat features, you can use AR/M16 Mags, it has a handly little mag holder in the stock of the gun, and is foldable. Foldable is cool to be because you can put it in a backpack, or take it hunting w/o taking up much room. I really don't care for the bipod, I'll probably never use it, but kinda neat to have it there. Although they coulda used that space for something cooler.

The only downside of the gun is the Alpha model sights. They are kinda geeky, not easily adjusted, and not liked by the AR crowd at all. But you can buy the Bravo model and get AR style sights that are much better (adds about $30-$40 to the price). Or you can buy the Alpha model and then buy the Bravo sights (for $30-$40). The Alpha has a longer heavier barrel than the Bravo but the Bravo is a shorter rifle with better sights. Personally I like the longer barrel of the Alpha with the sights from the Bravo.

And if you read the reviews on the SU16, almost every person has shot the rifle has turned out to love it. And that has to say something.

So basically you get a gun that is easily transportable, a much better shooter, lighter, and cheaper than the Mini. And on top of it, you don't give any money to Ruger. And Kel Tec has a great warranty and great customer service. Two things that go a long way in my book."

It also seems funny to me that people rag on the SU16 for being plastic... how much of the AR is plastic? I'd personally like to see some of you 'tuffguys' break the SU16's reinforced polymer. :rolleyes:
 
Don't hold back, Justang. Tell us how you really feel about the SU-16 :D

I've had 4 Kel-Tecs & loved every one of them; did not care for my buddy's Sub .40 though. Figger an SU is somewhere in the future.

Sam
 
LOL. I try not to. :p I really dislike misinformation. And saying a Mini is more accurate than a SU16 is just... ignorant. And I don't mean that as an insult, he just lacked the knowledge.

Tell it like it is, I guess.
 
For $399 the SU-16 sounds like a winner. I've handled one at a gun show and was not impressed with the overall feel of the weapon but that says nothing to how it shoots. The sights also seemed a little cheesy for me as well, that combined with the fact that they were brand new when I was looking for a .223 autoloader made me decide against one (maybe for the worst). I looked at an AR-180b and a Mini-14 next and I liked both of them but I knew I would probably not be real content with the accuracy of either weapon without spending a little money on mods. Had I known about the Olympic Plinker that sales around $499 I would have been all over that and not thought twice, as the availability of parts make it impossible to not be pleased with its performance. I ended up deciding on the Bushmaster M17 that has turned out to be a fine weapon with proper optics but a little on the heavy side. I manage to get groups under 1 MOA with ease at a bench. If you can deal with its shortcomings than I would recommend one, but only if you can get used to the "feel" of the weapon which I have gotten quite used to and like. Next I would say the AR-180b, then perhaps the SU-16 but I know little about their performance, however, everyone who shoots the Kel-Tecs seem to really enjoy them. At the time I just wanted something with a little more heft to it. I'm not trying to rant but I went through the same thing about 8 months ago. Good Luck!
 
You could probably pick up a the su or a mini-14 with an aftermarket folder on it for a reasonable prices. Either one is a great rifle for thier intended purpose. Wonderful plinkers. Just don't buy either expecting a 1 moa target rifle. Have fun and make sure you keep some money in the ammo budget! :)
 
Before Remington acquired their importation paperwork, the .223 Saigas were also something to be considered.

Kharn
 
LOL. I try not to. I really dislike misinformation. And saying a Mini is more accurate than a SU16 is just... ignorant. And I don't mean that as an insult, he just lacked the knowledge.

Tell it like it is, I guess.


He didn't say it was more accurate, he said it didn't feel like a toy. He didn't lack knowledge, you lacked literacy. Funny that your reply to the closest alternative to a SU-16 was an SU-16. Maybe he wanted something that he wouldn't break if he dropped it. Also, like I pointed out on that other post that you referenced, Kel Tec puts warranty work in the same line as custom work. That is ????ty customer service IMHO, especially compared to Ruger's legendary warranty (your gun comes back like new, turn around is currently about 6 weeks, ask me how I know).
I have owned my Mini-14 for over 5 years (bought used in good shape), I am a farmer, I live on 125 acres of sod farm, I take 300 yard shots, and my Mini closes the deal. Does it group as well as your SU-16? I don't know, but my Mini was manufactured in 1981, and I bet it will give your SU a run for its money now, let your SU in 2026 (bet those nifty arm/bi-pods are broken by then). I just do not belive that the SU will take anywhere close to the punishment that a Mini will take. I don't mean this as an insult, I just think you lack knowledge. I own a Mini-14 and a Kel Tec Carbine, and their build quality is nothing alike.
High caps? Not hard to find, for the 100th time, a little company known as RAMLINE sells great ones for less than $25.
But it won't take AR mags (excpet those aforementioned Ramline mags, they fit ARs or Minis) so I didn't suggest it for this guy.
 
Out of the box I highly doubt your Mini is as accurate as the SU. And I think it's been proven.

I didn't say his closest alternative was a SU... I was telling him to go with the SU. And you complain about my literacy?

And 357 said the Mini was a much better design. I don't buy that. For the reasons stated below, I feel the Kel Tec is a better gun. But as with most, people will defend their purchase w/o real knowledge of other products. So I spread some knowledge. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, if he thinks it feels like a toy, then he does. But to me, design is not up for debate. I *personally* don't like the way the Mini shoots, and I don't think the SU feels like a toy.

Yes the Kel Tec will break if you drop it. I bet if you sneeze on the bipod arms they'll just fly right off. :rolleyes: Yes it's plastic, no it's not wood, yes it's lighter, but lighter doesn't always mean less durable.

I bet if you bought a Kel Tec you'd like it more than your Mini. Most shooters do. ;) But I'm sure most of you are happy with your Mini's. That's fine. I just strive for something better. :p Seriously though, if the Mini works for you, then use it. It's just my opinion that the SU is a better gun.
 
Mini-14's are pretty much tanks, there is no doubt in my mind that it could handle 5 times the abuse of an SU-16. But, has anyone tested the durability of the SU-16? I know that they are supposed to be quite accurate and fairly reliable but I wonder what the could really take. They most certainly could not be "battle ready" but they may be durable enough for lots of use, I don't know. Also, the SU-16 does have significant advantages with flexability that the Mini-14 can't really touch, it takes AR-15 mags, folds in half, has a gas piston gas system, has built in picatinny rail, has a bipod and mag holder, supposed to be a 1-2 MOA rifle, and is for sale around $450. I think the REAL answer to Drakejake's question is that there is no true competition for what the SU-16 has to offer, there is nothing quite like it. A Mini-14 is a completely different horse all together. They are tough and reliable but if you have one that hits 2-3 MOA out of the box than consider yourself VERY VERY lucky.
 
Out of the box I highly doubt your Mini is as accurate as the SU. And I think it's been proven.
Really? Where is the proof? I have only seen one magazine do a SU-16 writeup that was positive, and even they said that the gun wouldn't pass the FBI/DEA 20 foot throw test. The gun did shoot a 1.6" or so group at 100 yards, which my Mini won't do, but I never said it would. In fact I said :
Does it group as well as your SU-16? I don't know, but my Mini was manufactured in 1981, and I bet it will give your SU a run for its money now, let alone your SU in 2026 (bet those nifty arm/bi-pods are broken by then).

So whether or not my Mini groups like your SU "out of the box" might depend on if the box ever fell of the shelf or not. :neener: And its not like there is a whole lot difference in a 2MOA gun and a 3MOA gun at ranges you shoot .223 at. In fact at 400 yards (the very max range for either gun IMHO, you are talking about 4" difference in group size. Either gun will hit a man's head or give a coyote a double lung shot at 300 yards. One will last to give to your kids. The other looks and handles like something they'd play with.

And my Mini isn't "out of the box" anyway, it has a flash hider, a barrel shroud, a choate folding stock, a B Square weaver mount, and I still got less than $550 in the whole deal. If I bought it now, I'd have even less in it, because I paid a little premium for "pre-ban" back when it mattered. So you could have a Mini just like mine for less than $500 if you looked hard and were patient. And you could throw it 20 feet onto pavement, pick it up, and it would still shoot where you aimed it. I think the SU would break the first time I threw it in the back floorboard of my truck.
 
The last gunsmith I talked to (about 3 hours ago... went shooting today) said he hated the Mini's. Simply for accuracy. And said out of the box the SU blows the Mini out of the water. As you know, I agree with him. :p

And I said the accuracy of the SU16 was better than the Mini. I believe SWAT has a good review out now, so does Guns Magazine, and there are a couple respected guys on the net that did testing and loved them.

I guarantee you could throw the SU and still pick it up and shoot it and have it still be ok... well, unless it's the Alpha model... they have plastic sights, so that might effect it. BUT, the Bravo's have AR style sights that are metal. And the stock would be far from breaking... the bipod arms would survive just fine too (if closed, I wouldn't venture to guess if they were open.). Besides, I've said before I don't care for the Bipod arms. I wish they would put something else on there. I don't think I'll ever use um.

But you're still basing a used gun price to a new gun price. You will defend your purchase until you don't have the gun any more. It's human instinct. But the SU is a better shooting gun out of the box. ;) Thus a better purchase, IMO.
 
Why dont ya'll just chip in and buy me one of each and I'll do a little field testing and get the results to you in say...a year or two :neener:

Seriously,I plan on buying both simply because they are both semi-auto .223's.
Have to do it one at a time so the wifey dont chunk me and my guns out :D
 
Well, since a gunsmith's word is proof:
The last gunsmith I talked to (the one who Volquartsen-ed out my 10/22) said he owns three Minis, two 14s (I've seen them both) and a 30. One of the 14s a 191-serial has been to Accuracy systems, and (he claims) shoots less than 1 MOA. The other 14 is a 185-serial and is out-of-the box except for a BC folder, and his own trigger job and (again he claims) its a sub-3 MOA gun (like mine). I don't know anything at all about his 30, I've never seen it.

I did compare used gun price to new gun price, because I've not seen many used SU-16s, but I see many more used Minis than new ones. Find me some prices on used SUs and we'll compare used to used. Also I'll defend the gun even if I don't have it anymore, because its a great gun, and not at all inaccurate like some people claim. I think its funny that you try to psychology my ???? because you want to propogate something about a gun that you don't own, and something that you admit is just hearsay.

How about this, you find a Mini owner in Cali, and offer to shoot groups sitting, standing, and prone at 100 yards. Compare those groups with ones fired from his Mini in the same positons. Then give him your rifle, you take his, and each of you get three tries to break the other guys's gun over your leg, gripping it by the barrel and stock. Then trade back and shoot the groups again. I'll find a SU owner in AL/TN and propose the same thing to him.

I don't see any advantage to a SU at all. AR magazines mean squat now that the AWB is over. It won't shoot folded up, and I think a monkey with a crayon could engineer something nicer looking. Also, it won't shoot folded up, you are stuck with that ????ty sporter style stock and you have nowhere to mount a flashlight. I don't have anything against plastic guns, I own two Glocks, the Sub2000, and even my 10/22 has a Butler Creek Co-polymer .920 barrel. I have shot several other Kel-Tecs including a 9mm compact that I liked and a subcompact .40 that had a recoil/muzzle flip issue). I do have something against crappy build quality though, and I think the SU-Alpha (though not Kel-Tec in general) epitomizes it. The B is a little better, I still haven't seen a C.

Honestly, If you plan to buy a Mini and an SU, but a AR-180 instead, or for the price of both ($850ish) you could have a nice DPMS or RRA AR. Being able to change uppers would be nice, and that is why one day I will prolly get an AR too.
 
I don’t own either a mini or a su16, but I am hoping to buy the su16 in the next year. TO me the advantages of a folding rifle with good ergonomics, that takes a cheap, plentiful magazine that I already own for other rifles is a very good thing.

Even though the ban is over, you can’t get cheap decent standard capacity magazines for your mini, though you can for the su16. I would love to get a su16 for a easily transportable rifle.

The mini looks nicer to me when its in a decent synthetic stock or wood, but the aftermarket folding stocks make it feel like a broken cheap toy.
 
Yes, any gun can be made to be a 1 MOA gun if you put enough money into it. I keep refering to 'out of the box.'

Why can't we compare new to new? I'd guess because the Kel Tec is cheaper new.
My Dad owns a Mini, so I have access to it any time I want. That's how I know I don't like the Mini. ;)

The advantages are there. Wether you choose to like them or not is a different story. I personally like the way the SU looks.

Can't have AR's in California.
 
I own both. Unless you put another $300 or more into the Mini-14 (ASI), it will not shoot as accurately as the SU-16. Ruger's barrel is too whippy for any kind of sustained shooting (meaning more than 3-5 shots). The SU-16 barrel does not suffer from this problem.

No one said the SU-16 was a battle rifle. The Mini-14, as rugged as it is, is not a battle rifle either. If your test for rifles is to break it over one's legs, then shoot it, the AR's will perform rather poorly as well. And watch out that you don't break that durable rear sight on the Ranch models in your "testing." Although the SU-16 does feel toyish and flimsy, it is not. Your exaggerations about throwing it 20 feet and not shooting accurately are just that, exaggerations. You'd have more credibility if you stayed away from the hyperbole.

And for the 100th time, the best mags for Mini-14's are PMI mags, not Ramline. Do a search. Some even speculate that PMI mags ARE factory mags. People have reported feed problems with most every other brand.

Personally, I think the SU-16's bipod is cheesy. I leave mine locked in place. If they weren't there, I wouldn't mind. The folding stock option is pretty cool, but again it's a feature I could do without. Being able to use AR mags is an advantage, since quality AR mags are more readily available and cheaper than quality Mini mags. And how can the Alpha model epitomize cheap build, but not the Bravo? Aside from the barrels and sights (which can be retrofitted), they're the same. The SU-16 comes with a rail (no need for the B-Square), but the Ranch comes with rings. Wash.

From personal experience, customer service from both Kel-Tec and Ruger are great. I had to send my SU-16 back so they could throat it out for SA-80 mags, and it came back to me in about a month. I've called Ruger for various small parts for my rimfire pistols and rifles, and they sent the parts free of charge every time, no questions asked. No complaints either way.

I guess it boils down to what you want. Do you want an inaccurate, durable rifle you can give to your grandchildren (so they, too, can miss what they're aiming at), or do you want a more accurate rifle that can't withstand the "throw" test?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top