Kel-Tec
- Thread starter tschlar
- Start date
- Status
RX-178
Member
They are very lightweight, very reliable, and use standard AR mags.
The only problem is they aren't as affordable as they used to be. Supply and demand has gotten them up to close to the same price as an entry level AR-15.
That being said, you still can't really go wrong with an SU-16 based on its merits and performance.
The only problem is they aren't as affordable as they used to be. Supply and demand has gotten them up to close to the same price as an entry level AR-15.
That being said, you still can't really go wrong with an SU-16 based on its merits and performance.
Hammerhead6814
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 701
These things used to be great. But once they started topping $600 a rifle, the party was over. When I bought my C it was $627.63 after tax. That's just the rifle.
On KTOG I hear of guys who spent less than $500 for a used, under $550 for a NEW.
Once you figure in the cost of a scope and rings, and ammo (DEAR GOD .223 WON'T GO DOWN), and the muzzle brake, and the ammo, and the extra magazines, and the ammo your spending that $1000 and when you finally get it to the range you realize that you really just should have spent that money on a DPMS AR-10 clone. With an Adams Arms gas piston. With extra magazines and ammo.
.308 is actually cheaper in my area that Remington .223. I never thought I'd see the day.
ALL that being said, sometimes you'll get lucky. One shop here in KC has a used CA on the shelf for $479.99. After tax your looking under $550. That's the way it should be. If you can find one of these at pre-panic pricing you'll probably love it. Until you buy ammo that is.
On KTOG I hear of guys who spent less than $500 for a used, under $550 for a NEW.
Once you figure in the cost of a scope and rings, and ammo (DEAR GOD .223 WON'T GO DOWN), and the muzzle brake, and the ammo, and the extra magazines, and the ammo your spending that $1000 and when you finally get it to the range you realize that you really just should have spent that money on a DPMS AR-10 clone. With an Adams Arms gas piston. With extra magazines and ammo.
.308 is actually cheaper in my area that Remington .223. I never thought I'd see the day.
ALL that being said, sometimes you'll get lucky. One shop here in KC has a used CA on the shelf for $479.99. After tax your looking under $550. That's the way it should be. If you can find one of these at pre-panic pricing you'll probably love it. Until you buy ammo that is.
I've really enjoyed my CA. Seemed to be the best of the lot, with the heavier barrel and more durable sights. I haven't had any problems at all. Great little option for the money. i got mine at budsgunshop.com and saved nearly $100 from ordering through my local FFL/shop.
KingMedicine
Member
Actually, i just bought one used today for 340. Its a su-16b tho, not the C model.
But for the price and for the feel, it seems like a pretty solid light rifle that will be great to shoot.
But for the price and for the feel, it seems like a pretty solid light rifle that will be great to shoot.
thriftyjoe
Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
- Messages
- 121
I'm really attracted to the Kel tec SU 16 CA the whole idea of it folding in half it can fit in a suitcase and its so light weight... just great.
However something feels wrong, from appearance and a little handling it feels like it doesn't have the reliability an AR or mini 14 would have.
how durable is it? how prone to jamming is it? and can i put thousands of rounds down the tube and it will continue to shoot no problem?
I'd be glad to be convinced of the Kel tec su 16's reliablility...
However something feels wrong, from appearance and a little handling it feels like it doesn't have the reliability an AR or mini 14 would have.
how durable is it? how prone to jamming is it? and can i put thousands of rounds down the tube and it will continue to shoot no problem?
I'd be glad to be convinced of the Kel tec su 16's reliablility...
greyling22
Member
They're too expensive. if they priced them at 350 to 400 they would be great. ditto on they mini-24 plus about $50. when you can get an AR for 600 bucks it just makes sense to me to pay less for a less good gun. (less good being my opinion)
It's not a battle rifle and I only have about 700 rounds down the tube. I've had 1 failure to eject which may have been ammo related. It stays super clean due to the piston system, and has required virtuallly no cleaning aside from the barrel. Weight doesn't always = reliability.
Golden_006
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 285
So then what good is this rifle if it's not battle rifle reliable? What's the point of having a .223 that takes AR mags if it's not battle tough? Why isn't it a battle rifle anyway?
Grey Morel
Member
Don't read into that too much. From what Iv seen the reliability is just fine.
The SU-16 will take good care of you if you treat it well.... But its not Idiot proof. If you issued them to the Army, 1/2 of them would be broken by the end of the week.
The SU-16 will take good care of you if you treat it well.... But its not Idiot proof. If you issued them to the Army, 1/2 of them would be broken by the end of the week.
Golden_006
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 285
What does the Army try and destroy their guns or something or since they didn't pay for them will just treat them any which way?
thriftyjoe
Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
- Messages
- 121
Can i hear from one Kel Tec Su-16 owner, just one, that he put thousands of rounds down the tube and mybe even rolled it in the mud and it kept shooting????
KingMedicine
Member
The SU-16 isent an Assault rifle like a AR-15 is. Its a Sport Utility rifle. Its mean't for backpacking, a car rifle, an ATV rifle, or something easy to carry if you need a survival rifle.
If your looking for an assault rifle, then it wont fit the bill.
I really just am tired of lugging a lever action rifle when im backpacking when this weights 5 pounds and can hold 60 rounds inside of it. Its super easy to clean and i like the attached rail.
If your looking for an assault rifle, then it wont fit the bill.
I really just am tired of lugging a lever action rifle when im backpacking when this weights 5 pounds and can hold 60 rounds inside of it. Its super easy to clean and i like the attached rail.
M2 Carbine
member
I've had the CA since May, 06. At that time it cost $544 OTD.
It's a good rifle. Probably not as good as a decent AR but then it costs a whole lot less than a AR.
Mine took a little breaking in but now it's reliable.
It's about as accurate as the average AR.
I installed a Phantom flash hider because I had a spare.
With the stock folded the gun can't be fired, the "C" model can.
As with all Kel Tec guns the rifle has a no BS lifetime warranty.
For some time now the rifle has been doing duty as a "car gun".
It's a good rifle. Probably not as good as a decent AR but then it costs a whole lot less than a AR.
Mine took a little breaking in but now it's reliable.
It's about as accurate as the average AR.
I installed a Phantom flash hider because I had a spare.
With the stock folded the gun can't be fired, the "C" model can.
As with all Kel Tec guns the rifle has a no BS lifetime warranty.
For some time now the rifle has been doing duty as a "car gun".
Comparisons of the SU16 with AR15s and AR10s is inappropriate (btw, none of them are "battle rifles" or "assault rifles").
As KingMedicine points out it is, and always has been, a Sport Utility Rifle more appropriately compared to the Mini-14 ("Ranch Rifle" was Ruger's new catchy name for a handy semiauto rifle and people compare it the the AR15 also).
The Su16 isn't intended to be as tough as an M-16, but then there are AR15s that aren't either. It's not supposed to take the abuse that the Mini-14 can with it's fixed wooden stock. Of course it doesn't weigh as much as a Mini-14 and it does fold. By reports from folks that I know that have them they're at least as reliable as the Mini-14 and as reliable as good AR15s and more reliable than low end ARs.
The SU16 costs just around $600 vs. Mini-14 running about $750 vs. the ARs at $750 to $850 (inexpensive with unknown reliability). Can't find the KT for that price? Perhaps folks are buying them up when they show up. Is it a "better" deal at $450 or $500? Sure it is, but the fact that you could find them at that price before doesn't mean they still aren't a good deal when stacked against the Mini-14 (or any other ranch SUV rifle). Want something tough and reliable that's cheap? Get an AK.
As KingMedicine points out it is, and always has been, a Sport Utility Rifle more appropriately compared to the Mini-14 ("Ranch Rifle" was Ruger's new catchy name for a handy semiauto rifle and people compare it the the AR15 also).
The Su16 isn't intended to be as tough as an M-16, but then there are AR15s that aren't either. It's not supposed to take the abuse that the Mini-14 can with it's fixed wooden stock. Of course it doesn't weigh as much as a Mini-14 and it does fold. By reports from folks that I know that have them they're at least as reliable as the Mini-14 and as reliable as good AR15s and more reliable than low end ARs.
The SU16 costs just around $600 vs. Mini-14 running about $750 vs. the ARs at $750 to $850 (inexpensive with unknown reliability). Can't find the KT for that price? Perhaps folks are buying them up when they show up. Is it a "better" deal at $450 or $500? Sure it is, but the fact that you could find them at that price before doesn't mean they still aren't a good deal when stacked against the Mini-14 (or any other ranch SUV rifle). Want something tough and reliable that's cheap? Get an AK.
- Status
