Perfect Union banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,271 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
The new Kel Tec carbine is an awesome bug out, truck rifle or lightweight rifle. It's a .223 and takes AR-15, 10,20 and 30 round Mags.
It folds in half and locks back with one pin. It has a barrel just over 16"
It holds two 10 round Mags in the bottom of the buttstock that pull out easy, but stay put unless you grab them.
The forearm unlocks then swings down and forms a pretty solid tripod and then the two halves snap back onto the rifle with ease.
It has a chrome lined barrel and has a picitinney rail built in on the top.
The trigger is so,so, but is easy to work into a decent trigger.
My friend just bought one and with a scope, was shooting regular 3/4" groups @ 100 yds.
It's the Swiss Army knife of rifles.
It's 100% made in the USA. It looks kinda cheap as it's almost all polymar plastic, but the thing is reliable as can be and shoots better than a lot of bolt guns.
We fired 100 rounds right out of the box with zero failure to feed or eject.
We had one aftermarket Mag that caused problems, but a mil spec 20 round AR mag and the two 10 round mags that come with the rifle were flawless.
It also has a bolt head like the AR-15, but has a gas piston, not a gas tube, so carbon build up is not a problem.
If you want a lightweight rifle, that is easy to store in your car, truck or backpack that shoots really well, check out this rifle.
The sights are plastic with a peep sight in the rear and a tall fire sight in the front. They look like the front sight might break, but it's pretty darn tough.
Kel Tec really did their homework on this weapon. It is very well thought out.
If you buy one, replace the take down pin with one from the hardware store with the ring on the end of it. It makes it far easier to remove and replace.
Get one while you can, they are going to sell fast.
It looks a little cheap, but it works better than a lot of $2000 rifles that I have shot.
It is the perfect rifle for your Bug Out kit. I've never seen one better as far as being compact, tough, reliable and accurite in such a small and lightweight size.

Best Regards,
John K
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
185 Posts
So this would be the SU-16????
 

·
Moderator and Super Member
Joined
·
7,547 Posts
This thread isn't worth anything without a model and a photo!
 

·
hostilenativelibertarian.
Joined
·
7,825 Posts
;)You'll want to hold out to buy the su-16c(as in charlie)because you can also fire it with the stock in the folded position.Yup-I got one!:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,165 Posts
First, I'm assuming SU-16, but model and photo's, as mentioned above, would be much obliged.

If so, it's an incredibly clever design, and I'm happy to hear the accuracy you reported.

Second, any rapid fire? Either way, how'd the barrel heat up compared to, say, the Mini?

Third, I handled an early model a few years ago, and the polymer seemed pretty wobbly/flexible. Not saying it affected function at all, just felt weird for a rifle . . . and I'm familiar with the first polymer rifle, the Remington 66. What'd you think of the feel?

---------
Side note: The Rem 66 was so named because of the Nylon 6,6 polymer (comma not a typo). That same polymer is used in Glock frames and women's hose. The difference in feel is subject only to the length of the molecular chains when the polymer is extruded.
---------

Finally, Kel-Tec's blued finishes leave much to be desired. What finish did the rifle have and how did it seem?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
So wait I can't seem to find anything about the SU 16 on their website. Is it the one in the picture on their home page with the pistol grip and the collapsible stock?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
I was going to start a thread about this yesterday but somehow I forgot. I think this is probably a better rifle than the mini-14 in pretty much all aspects. It accepts an already widely available magazine, uses a common caliber, is cheaper than the mini-14, comes with a picatinny rail for optics.

The only con is it isn't very widely known yet, nor have after-marketers picked up on it. So far I think there are only a few companies that make a quad fore end rail.

It appears to be the perfect blend of the m4 and the ak. Reliability with precision and extremely low recoil. (that is unless you're a crazy SOB and you have a PLR-16)

Needless to say, I can't wait to get my hands on one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
I was going to start a thread about this yesterday but somehow I forgot. I think this is probably a better rifle than the mini-14 in pretty much all aspects. It accepts an already widely available magazine, uses a common caliber, is cheaper than the mini-14, comes with a picatinny rail for optics.

The only con is it isn't very widely known yet, nor have after-marketers picked up on it. So far I think there are only a few companies that make a quad fore end rail.
The SU-16 is not perfect. It is very lightweight, but it lacks the durability of other guns because of its lightweight polymer construction. Yes it is probably "strong enough" for most things but I wouldn't accidentally run one over with my car like I could a Mini.

I've also run across one person who had a problem with a wandering zero with one using both irons and scope. Though I also ran across someone who was outshouting my AK and another guys AR.<_< So I guess it depends on your specimen.

I personally would consider the use of AR mags as a downside to the gun. A flimsy design that has been a problem for decades because of their lack of durability. (Since they were originally supposed to be disposable like stripper clips.) You are right though, despite the horrible design of the AR mag, it is still very common.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
185 Posts
It must be remembered that the M-16 mags were originaly designed to be straight 20rnd mags cheaply manufactured from extruded aluminium and be tossed aside like enblock clips in combat.
Eugine Stoner threw a royal tantrum when ever the idea of a bent 30rnder was mentioned, but then Eugene was never a soldier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
The SU-16 is not perfect. It is very lightweight, but it lacks the durability of other guns because of its lightweight polymer construction. Yes it is probably "strong enough" for most things but I wouldn't accidentally run one over with my car like I could a Mini.
I'm sorry but I have to call bullsh*t on that. not even the mini could withstand a ton or more vehicle, sure it might be a bit more durable, but then again who is that ignorant and forgetful, as well as abusive to their firearm. Even to lesser extents, and I still think the SU-16 could be used as a battle rifle. Especially with the "E", or A and B stocks.

I've also run across one person who had a problem with a wandering zero with one using both irons and scope. Though I also ran across someone who was outshouting my AK and another guys AR.<_< So I guess it depends on your specimen.
Definitely true.

I personally would consider the use of AR mags as a downside to the gun. A flimsy design that has been a problem for decades because of their lack of durability. (Since they were originally supposed to be disposable like stripper clips.) You are right though, despite the horrible design of the AR mag, it is still very common.
I certainly think they are better than Mini-14 mags. Chances are you can find an off-brand AR-15 that will fire all the rounds in them without jamming compared to the mini which requires that you get a mag from Ruger to ensure that it won't jam on you.

I think as long as you keep your fingers away from pushing down on the feed lips, you should be ok.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
It must be remembered that the M-16 mags were originaly designed to be straight 20rnd mags cheaply manufactured from extruded aluminium and be tossed aside like enblock clips in combat.
Eugine Stoner threw a royal tantrum when ever the idea of a bent 30rnder was mentioned, but then Eugene was never a soldier.
Eugene Stoner was a retired Marine so that's not true at all.

From Wikipedia:

Eugene Stoner Wikipedia Article said:
During World War II, he enlisted for Aviation Ordnance in the U.S. Marine Corps and served in the South Pacific and northern China.
 

·
Moderator and Super Member
Joined
·
7,547 Posts
I personally would consider the use of AR mags as a downside to the gun. A flimsy design that has been a problem for decades because of their lack of durability. (Since they were originally supposed to be disposable like stripper clips.) You are right though, despite the horrible design of the AR mag, it is still very common.
It must be remembered that the M-16 mags were originaly designed to be straight 20rnd mags cheaply manufactured from extruded aluminium and be tossed aside like enblock clips in combat.
Eugine Stoner threw a royal tantrum when ever the idea of a bent 30rnder was mentioned, but then Eugene was never a soldier.
The original mag may not be as tough as it could, but the platform is so ubiquitous that many alternatives are on the market that beat the original aluminum hands down. The same cannot be said of any other platform including the mini, where the original steel is still the best available and not nearly as common on the market as AR mags. Like it or not, this is a country dominated by the M-16.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
It must be remembered that the M-16 mags were originaly designed to be straight 20rnd mags cheaply manufactured from extruded aluminium and be tossed aside like enblock clips in combat.
Eugine Stoner threw a royal tantrum when ever the idea of a bent 30rnder was mentioned, but then Eugene was never a soldier.
Were you? His service to his country has nothing todo with his weapons design. Infact he knew aluminum mags were prone to damage but wanted a lighter mag so planned on them being disposable. Less weight sounds good to this grunt, not worrying about spent mags does to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
I'm sorry but I have to call bullsh*t on that. not even the mini could withstand a ton or more vehicle, sure it might be a bit more durable, but then again who is that ignorant and forgetful, as well as abusive to their firearm. Even to lesser extents, and I still think the SU-16 could be used as a battle rifle. Especially with the "E", or A and B stocks.
Definitely not bull****. AKs and ARs are run over with trucks to test durability. There are videos of various manufacturers doing that to showcase durability.

Here is one such video. FF to 4:20. They run over the AK twice with a Hummer then run a mag through it.


Again, I'm not saying the SU-16 is a bad gun. I'm just saying don't call it something that it isn't. It's very light and compact. Decently reliable. Inexpensive. Easy to maintain. etc. It is not a battle rifle any more than a Mini-14 is a 1,000 yard sniper rifle. Pretending that it is will simply result in many broken pieces of plastic.

I certainly think they are better than Mini-14 mags. Chances are you can find an off-brand AR-15 that will fire all the rounds in them without jamming compared to the mini which requires that you get a mag from Ruger to ensure that it won't jam on you.
That's not a fault of the design, that's a fault of the aftermarket manufacturer. Also, bad off brand AR mags jam just as much as bad off brand Mini mags. I've seen enough guys with ARs that can't get through a mag without several mag related jams to know that. The issue in the past was that Ruger didn't sell normal capacity magazines to civilians and after market makers didn't have access to the original design drawings and had to reverse engineer the mags. That and cutting corners to try and make a Mini mag for the same price as an AR mag.

Mini-14 mags are far more durable than AR mags, that's simple fact. Of course it's also a fact that that extra durability comes with increased price It's taken around 40 years or R&D into AR mags to compensated for the flimsy design. (Again, because they were supposed to be disposable.) Ruger mags were good from the start. The problem was a company that, at the time, hated letting civilians have normal cap mags and aftermarket manufacturers who didn't have access to the original design drawings

My factory folder came with a 25 year old factory mag that has seen plenty of use and has never been rebuilt. I hgihly doubt there are many 25 year old AR mags that are still serviceable and not rebuilt at least once. AK mags are in a leauge of their own in terms of durability.

I think as long as you keep your fingers away from pushing down on the feed lips, you should be ok.
Don't forget to keep ammo from pushing up on the feed lips too. There's a reason there are covers for AR mags that take pressure off the feed lips.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
185 Posts
I was going to say the same thing concerning Ruger mags, I have Ruger 20rnd mags that are about 32 years old that still function fine.
If AFTER MKT mags were better quality or Ruger mags were lower priced there would be no one arguing about the AR mags having an 'edge'.
I paid $40 per mag for new Ruger mags last month, I was not happy about it but without a reliable mag a semi-auto rifle is a single shot rifle and hard to load at that.
Ruger mags are expensive but you get your moneys worth, reliability is the name of the game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
I was going to say the same thing concerning Ruger mags, I have Ruger 20rnd mags that are about 32 years old that still function fine.
If AFTER MKT mags were better quality or Ruger mags were lower priced there would be no one arguing about the AR mags having an 'edge'.
I paid $40 per mag for new Ruger mags last month, I was not happy about it but without a reliable mag a semi-auto rifle is a single shot rifle and hard to load at that.
Ruger mags are expensive but you get your moneys worth, reliability is the name of the game.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but CDNN has 20 rounders for $25 each and 30's for $30.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
185 Posts
"I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but CDNN has 20 rounders for $25 each and 30's for $30. "
Your not; I was speaking to the price of OEM X39 mags
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top