what is /k/s opinion on the Kel Tec su 16 series of rifles?

they're shit m8

>>33357121
Cheap, lightweight, ultimately functional but will show greatly accelerated wear if you do a lot of magdumping or if you try to use it as you would an AR or AK, so don't look at it as a substitute for either, it can't take it.

Slow shooting at the range with generous pauses every 10 rounds or so, and it'll last well enough. It can handle some magdumping, but not a lot of it, and not frequently.

The handguards can be folded down into a bipod but this is a wasted feature, too flimsy, keep them folded up. Lower can fold up for storage, and stock can store one or two magazines (one 30 or two 10).

So, it has some pros, but also some cons, it'll work well enough but know it's limitations and what to expect. If you want a cheap gun which could save your life in a home invasion, it can do that.

>>33357121
They are super light and it makes 556 recoil more. I'm not a fan but done people love it. It's great for going hiking with because of its concealability

>>33357238
>If you want a cheap gun which could save your life in a home invasion, it can do that.

but they cost as much as an AR

>>33357121
They're inaccurate, light, flimsy rifles with a usable lifespan of under 10,000 rounds (potentially as low as 2000 rounds if all you do is magdump). If weight and stored/carried size are your two biggest priorities then they might fit your purpose but with them not being appreciably cheaper than a quality AR and more expensive than some of the supercheap AR's there are better options for most people.

>>33357465
I've seen them go for real cheap at a few places.

File: 47jvwo2.jpg (63KB, 1024x682px)

63KB, 1024x682px

would buy su-16 if stamped or metal

pistols are ok

File: LISA_battle_screen.jpg (116KB, 500x375px)

116KB, 500x375px

Is the RFB good?

>>33357121
Good AR alternative if you live in Canuckistan

File: egz9tKp.jpg (452KB, 1920x1080px)

452KB, 1920x1080px

if you tack enough shit to them you almost have an ar . . .

File: WP_20160630_11_34_37_Pro1 2_zpsoxj0rdyg.jpg (111KB, 1024x288px)

111KB, 1024x288px

>>33357121
The SCR is finally back in production so I'd rather have that.

>>33358008
>picture from 10 years ago
But yes, if they stamped the upper receiver and/or put in a silicone pad to act as a recoil buffer for where the bolt hits, I think it could vastly extend the life of the weapon.

>>33358564
Dubious. A VZ in .223 is much better and can be made to take 10rd AR mags.

>>33358663
It still can't take much magdumping and the lifespan of the weapon is still short.

I love mine. Perfect for its intended purpose as a camping or truck gun. Just don't beat on it.

>>33358678
Vastly superior, but also more costly, and I don't think it's even available to Canucks.

Kel-Tec's philosophy is about the same as Hi Point's; sell cheap crap at a lower price than something worth owning.

For the most part, their products go bang when you pull the trigger, but nobody with even a bit of experience would ever want to rely on them.

I think of them as cheap range toys, but the resale value would be about dogshit, and nobody but a total noob would want to buy them.

For a few bucks more, there's lots of options that would provide a shooter with a reliable firearm that will last for years and increase in value as opposed to disposable junk that's only worth a laugh or two on a tin can range.

Using a stamped steel receiver rather than plastic would have been a lot better desu

Good concept, bad execution, like with pretty much everything made by Keltec.