S&W FPC and new folding 9mm PCC?

[TTv2]

I saw one for sale locally today for $599. It seems like a reasonable price. It looks a little awkward but it grows on you. The grip is pretty much exactly like the pistol. I wish they would have changed it a little for a more original look.

Compared to the Sub 2000 that Kel Tec is now giving $100 rebates on, it's going to be a hard sell asking $600 for a new and unproven gun whose only advantage is the side folding meaning no optics issues. Only being available in M&P mags means I will never own one.

 

[toivo]

What bag is it?

FSDC -- Firearms Safety Devices Corporation, which it says right on the side in white stitching. Not exactly discreet -- I was thinking of blacking out the lettering with a Sharpie, but since the bag would mostly get stashed away anyway, it doesn't matter. I'm not going to be taking it on public transportation or anything like that.

 

[chicharrones]

Compared to the Sub 2000 that Kel Tec is now giving $100 rebates on, it's going to be a hard sell asking $600 for a new and unproven gun whose only advantage is the side folding meaning no optics issues. Only being available in M&P mags means I will never own one.

Not a hard sell at all to me.

I appreciate KelTec for all their design ingenuity, and I've looked at possibly purchasing a SUB 2K many times over the years. But I never made the leap because I'd would have to Mcarbo the SUB2K to make it how I'd want it. Not to mention the few I've seen on the web over the years that have broken in half that gives me great pause. A recent example here. So, no real savings for me to get the KelTec and by all appearances the S&W folding receiver parts look to be more robust* compared to the KelTec.

A few years ago, I made my choice over the KelTec and other contemporary PCCs by picking the Beretta CX4. If the S&W FPC would have been an option at that point in time, I'd have probably gone with the FPC over the CX4. Considering inflation has driven the price of a new CX4 to $798** vs. the $630 that I paid in 2018, the $600 FPC in 2023 looks even better.

*Edit to add photo to compare construction of the folding sections.


**Current gun shop price near me.

 

[Capybara]

If I remember correctly, this forum discussed the POF Tombstone, a “tactical looking” 9mm lever action. Everyone hated it despite myself and a few others making your exact point (or similar). There’s some guns the forum is determined to dislike. Maybe the traditional S&W stamp makes the forum give this one a chance it won’t give newer firearms. I laugh.

Yes, I recall. The Tombstone is pretty funky looking but once again, for me, function over form. If the gun does what one wants it to do and it's reliable and well built, what's not to like? Everyone has their "beautiful guns". For me, it's my CMP Garand that is in immaculate condition, it's a beautiful piece of mechanical art as well as being highly functional.

Then there are funky looking guns like my M&P12 Bullpump. By any stretch of the imagination, it's a bit weird and funky looking but for the mission I use it for, HD, it is by far the best choice for my needs, in my situation, I don't care what it looks like, I care about it's OAL, reliability and ammo capacity. I think most gun owners, especially older owners, buy many of their guns based on emotional wants and aesthetics, not so much on needs and function. I do both. I bought a Smith Model 17 .22 revolver simply because it is a stunningly beautiful work of mechanical art. But to me, ARs, Glocks, plastic guns in general are ugly, cheap and utilitarian looking, but damn do they do their job well so I buy them and enjoy them. This FPC is a bit funky looking but the design is really pretty neat so I am in. When it comes to guns, I really like almost all of them, they just have to be evaluated in different ways. That POF Tombstone is kind of cool in a way, it's ugly and cobbled together looking but I bet it's a blast to shoot.

 

[TTv2]

Not a hard sell at all to me.

I appreciate KelTec for all their design ingenuity, and I've looked at possibly purchasing a SUB 2K many times over the years. But I never made the leap because I'd would have to Mcarbo the SUB2K to make it how I'd want it. Not to mention the few I've seen on the web over the years that have broken in half that gives me great pause. A recent example here. So, no real savings for me to get the KelTec and by all appearances the S&W folding receiver parts look to be more robust* compared to the KelTec.

A few years ago, I made my choice over the KelTec and other contemporary PCCs by picking the Beretta CX4. If the S&W FPC would have been an option at that point in time, I'd have probably gone with the FPC over the CX4. Considering inflation has driven the price of a new CX4 to $798** vs. the $630 that I paid in 2018, the $600 FPC in 2023 looks even better.

*Edit to add photo to compare construction of the folding sections.
View attachment 1138146

**Current gun shop price near me.

I think you're falling back on brand perception because you have a constraint that doesn't allow you to think Kel Tec can be equal to S&W in product quality.

When the Wrangler was announced almost everyone knew it was going to be a better product than Heritage because it was made by Ruger. Fast forward to today and the Wrangler is the worst quality firearm Ruger produces to the point the Heritage is superior in function.

Let's let time and experience be the determining factors here, not some occasional broken receivers. At over twice the price the FPC has to be twice the gun the Sub2000 is and I doubt it is. Maybe having a better design to accommodate an optic is worth an extra $300 to some, to others it's meh.

Cx4 is definitely a PCC I have my eye on. Wish they'd make one that took Taurus 92 mags.

 

[chicharrones]

I think you're falling back on brand perception because you have a constraint that doesn't allow you to think Kel Tec can be equal to S&W in product quality.

Brand has nothing to do with it. Look at the photo again comparing the construction of the guns. It doesn't take much of a mechanical eye to see that the gun on the right appears to have a more robust design. The thickness of the polymer parts, the large pivot "bolts", the smooth and large transitions around those bolts, the large chamber walls, and solid barrel support block.

The KelTec SUB2000 looks like it would be a great design if the receiver was made of aluminum alloy. Which it originally was when it was the SUB 9.



Photos from http://www.bugoutsurvival.com/2010/03/kel-tec-sub-9.html

SUB 9 manual with parts diagram.

 

[someguy2800]

Brand has nothing to do with it. Look at the photo again comparing the construction of the guns. It doesn't take much of a mechanical eye to see that the gun on the right appears to have a more robust design. The thickness of the polymer parts, the large pivot "bolts", the smooth and large transitions around those bolts, the large chamber walls, and solid barrel support block.

The KelTec SUB2000 looks like it would be a great design if the receiver was made of aluminum alloy. Which it originally was when it was the SUB 9.

View attachment 1138167
View attachment 1138166
Photos from http://www.bugoutsurvival.com/2010/03/kel-tec-sub-9.html

SUB 9 manual with parts diagram.

I never knew they made an aluminum one. Sigh… now I have to find one…

 

[TTv2]

Brand has nothing to do with it. Look at the photo again comparing the construction of the guns. It doesn't take much of a mechanical eye to see that the gun on the right appears to have a more robust design. The thickness of the polymer parts, the large pivot "bolts", the smooth and large transitions around those bolts, the large chamber walls, and solid barrel support block.

The KelTec SUB2000 looks like it would be a great design if the receiver was made of aluminum alloy. Which it originally was when it was the SUB 9.

View attachment 1138167
View attachment 1138166
Photos from http://www.bugoutsurvival.com/2010/03/kel-tec-sub-9.html

SUB 9 manual with parts diagram.

AFAIK, the notch and locking latch are not known, common failure points and when it comes to these poly receivers I don't think any added thickness makes a difference to those that have broken in half. Those are likely defects from production, not wear & tear failures.

 

[CraigC]

When the Wrangler was announced almost everyone knew it was going to be a better product than Heritage because it was made by Ruger. Fast forward to today and the Wrangler is the worst quality firearm Ruger produces to the point the Heritage is superior in function.

Fake news. This is simply not true. The Ruger is a superior product or I wouldn't own five of them. Wouldn't take a free Heritage.

 

[chicharrones]

AFAIK, the notch and locking latch are not known, common failure points and when it comes to these poly receivers I don't think any added thickness makes a difference to those that have broken in half. Those are likely defects from production, not wear & tear failures.

Shouldn’t overlook the thicker receiver frame of the gun on the right, considering that’s the fail point of the gun on the left.

Makes me think of AR receivers made of polymer, but with the same dimensions of the forged aluminum gun. Crack, break, done.

It took CavArms (GWACS, WWSD) to come out with a beefed up polymer receiver to overcome the poly AR problem.

Clearly (to my mechanical eye), the designers of the FPC studied the receiver breaking problem of poly carbines and decided to create a stronger design.

 

[TTv2]

Fake news. This is simply not true. The Ruger is a superior product or I wouldn't own five of them. Wouldn't take a free Heritage.

You own 5 Wranglers?

 

[drobs]

I find it funny how S&W put a Glock trigger in this carbine but it doesn't use Glock mags. That's just stupid.
Then it copies Kel-Tec's method of operation - bolt in the stock.

 

[marvin02]

I find it funny how S&W put a Glock trigger in this carbine but it doesn't use Glock mags

It doesn't have a cylinder either.



Glock didn't invent the trigger safety, they "perfected" it.

Didn't Kel-Tec copy the function and form form of some other wildly popular rifle?

 

[CraigC]

All the bellyaching people do about "copying". How do you think we got here???

You own 5 Wranglers?

Yes.

 

[chicharrones]

I find it funny how S&W put a Glock trigger in this carbine but it doesn't use Glock mags. That's just stupid.
Then it copies Kel-Tec's method of operation - bolt in the stock.

Wait, wut?


https://blowback9.wordpress.com/2021/04/02/everything-about-the-ar9/

 

[drobs]

Wait, wut?

View attachment 1138462
https://blowback9.wordpress.com/2021/04/02/everything-about-the-ar9/

Same but different.

 

[someguy2800]

 

[Capybara]

For kicks I priced out the MCarbo how I would want and need it and it was nearly $1,000. No thanks, I'll take the FPC and a few magazines and will still end hundreds of dollars less for the Smith.

 

[Gordon]

Never see that much about my Ruger PCC Charger 9mm. This is before I added the Sig Folding brace. It is now Pending in the Brace SBR registration and I have removed the brace until I am approved, I know I don't have to... This has a heavy "dead blow" bolt that somewhat softens the impact, but still has , for me , surprising recoil for a 6 pound 9mm . The detachable barrel is very nice and I now have a mounted suppressor on it and that shortens into two pieces nicely. When I get SBR approval I will modify the Sig folding brace slightly into a stock pad and put on my Surefire 900 Pistol grip light . This Ruger can hold about 4" at 100 yards with 124 grain ammo.

Embarassing I can't get pictures formated to load from lousy photobucket right now, an ongoing problem once in a while.

 

[toivo]

What bag is it?

This appears to be the same bag, for considerably less than I paid ...
https://www.cdnnsports.com/rugerr-10-22-takedown-rifle-case-team-usa.html

 

[Middletown]

I am confused by the picture in post #78 by Chicharrones. Does the S&W split the barrel after the chamber. Seems like that would be hard to seal, never seen it done that I can remember. Anyway, I have already admitted I am confused.

 

[westernrover]

Revolvers do that, but I can only think of one that seals the chamber to the barrel. These carbines fold behind the chamber.

 

[chicharrones]

Revolvers do that, but I can only think of one that seals the chamber to the barrel. These carbines fold behind the chamber.

Yep. The chambers and barrels are one piece with these guns. What the barrel/chamber is mounted to is a different material. How it is attached to that, I have no actual knowledge.

 

[marvin02]

I picked mine up yesterday.

Took it home and went through it.

It is amazing light. The weight is either above your strong hand or supported by your shoulder, so it seems even lighter than it is.

I found the charging handle very stiff out of the box and lubed up where it rides.

After handling the rifle for just a few minutes I moved the mag release to the right side. I'm a righty, but it is easier for me to release the magazine with my trigger finger than with the thumb on my strong hand. I can drop a mag with very little movement of the rifle.

Make sure you put the rifle on safe before disassembly. You do not want accidentally pull the trigger and get the hammer in the forward position. The owners manual also states you can damage the rifle dry firing it while disassembled.

The disassembly of the rifle is shown very well on the Sootch video, starting at 14:20.

There is another spring not shown in that video that is in the stock.



There is a spring loaded latch on the bottom of the buffer tube where it joins the receiver. This engages a nub on the charging handle to hold it in the forward position.



I put 100 rounds through the gun. Trigger pull was about 5 pounds 1.6 ounces out of the box and was 4 pounds 8.3 ounces after 100 rounds and about 25 dry fires. That's a five pull average with a Lyman digital gauge.

It has a nice break and a distinct wall. I didn't even notice the trigger dingus.

I shot 40 rounds of S&B 124 grain, 45 rounds of Blazer Brass 124 grain, and 15 rounds of Blazer 115 grain. No malfunctions. It just worked.

The bolt latch stinks. Too small and can't be used as a bolt release.

It passed the smile test. I smiled when I opened the box and was still smiling when I was cleaning it after shooting.

For those who want other calibers, here is a tidbit from the owners manual:

 

[chicharrones]

Congrats on the new gun, @marvin02 ! The disclosure of the .40 ought to make some folks happy.