Is anyone aware of if I can obtain this in Canada?

Thanks

The bickering needs to end. No more discussion about reliability.

I forgot, you have such deep issues with the brand that logic no longer applies. Hang in there, keep slinging insults all you want. But where will you be when/if the positive reports start flowing in? Apologetic? Feel like a fool for previous comments? Nah, you’ll just fade away into the anonymity of the internet like so many flamers before you. Show some sense and wait till the reports start flowing in. Then if they’re negative, jump out with a giant “I TOLD YOU SO!”. All your doing now is setting yourself up to receive a bunch of them. I realize that you WANT the RFB to be junk, but isn’t it better to wait and see if it is before slinging mud?

Congratulations! and thanks for the mini review. We’ll be looking forward to your updates.

Malfunction on first round??? I guess we all have our own standards of “favorable”. I’m just glad I’m making my own weapon’s choices.

You can’t even get that right.

It was the 5th round & MAGAZINE related rather than the rifle…..

Your lack of ability to even get this right shows your irrational bias.

Car analogies have no bearing on this subject: The Kel-Tec RFB has received favourable reports from all & sundry, up to & including a comparison with current military firearms.
Tell me: Have you even SEEN the RFB for real, never mind handling or firing it?
At the beginning of October I’ll get some real time comparison in between the RFB, Steyr-Aug, FN F2000, L85A2 & TAR-21 & that’s just the bullpups. Now what they look like but how they handle & shoot.
When I get back to the UK afterwards, I might just let you know how they do – without any unsubstantiated & preconceived bias based on completely different products………

In the past I’ve seen similar issues with new firearms from Colt, DSA, FN, Kimber, CZ., etc……..

….a couple of drops of lube in the right place & some rounds down range to bed in the action & they’ve been fine, or have you never noticed that guns smooth out after initial use?

Give credit where it’s due & by ALL accounts it’s owed to Kel-Tec for the RFB

You can’t give up can you?
ALL the reports I’ve seen on the RFB have been favourable – from those who’ve actually used one.
So why should your uninformed & subjective bias against Kel-Tec mean anything?

Oh, it doesn’t.

Good luck with that Kel-Tec.

If a model is offered where the overall length is legal and the accuracy is MOA or better then 1 rifle may be the only thing you need.

Especially if you keep the package to an overall small form factor and you carrry (or install) a pair of backup irons.

It will be at least a year till yo will be able to find one of these and see it in a gun rack ready for you to take a look at it.

Before then it is all order+pray it is right for you.

As a survival style firearm it may have no equal for all that it can do if it performs as well as reports are saying it is.

I would like to have one to test in a real world mountain run and see how it would act in that capacity.

Thanks for the link. That’s an informative thread. I especially appreciated the info on the RFB’s accuracy and trigger. Every bullpup I have fired or handled had a horrid trigger. Looks like the RFB will not only be more accurate than I had thought, but have a sweet trigger too! This is turning out more and more to be exactly what I was looking for in a rifle.

Now if only gun show sales would pick up, so I can afford the 24 inch model when it comes out!

Great Q & A with Matt from Kel-Tec R&D

Just about anything you could ask is answered!

Although I do not want to derail the conversation at all, the MKIII is the pistol I am picking up and I am going the extra step to teflon coat it.

“Big Gun/Little Pistol” and “Big Pistol/Little Gun” is the mantra I follow.

The way I figure it, if I have to fight something big enough that .22 does not cut it I want to power and range of a rifle.

Ammo is fairly compatible in size/weight to large hand guns in the greater scheme of things.

This is where the RFB fits in really well. It is compact and lightweight. Easily stored and carried and if needed it will perform as a battle rifle or to take game that is too big for the .22.

I am in Northern CA and my options for bugouts is slimmer than most. If I take off in any direction I am going to find good spots every 10 miles but a lot of nothing inbetween.

For the RFB it would end up in the pack 99% of the time until I find a base I like and want to hold it.

Then it would stay out and with me most of the time.

I have thought of the matching pistol to rifle combination however there are drawbacks to this solution which mainly come from the rifle selections. I have yet to see a really good ’survival’ style .357 rifle.

The thought was to get one and take it through the ringer for survival and then match it to a pistol.

Issues being that .357 is not a good small game round, definately not good for birds, decent all around for medium to large game and ok on larger than that.

As per the article, the odds of you needing and using the larger gun is slim compared to snares, .22’s, traps, fishing, etc.

The larger gun should be compact and ready to go and your secondary weapon should be lighter and used more often.

.22 is the choice for this.

For the larger gun you have tons of choices but for this left hander the RFB in .308 is just about written for me compared to almost everything else out there.

Granted, I could do just fine with my .30-30, my shotgun, my pointed stick with a mean face written on it, etc.

You do not need the RFB to survive in any stectch of the imagination.

If you are in that niche like me though it is very appealing and even if you are not you have to admit that it does some things that other firearms simply can’t.

I have a 9mm bullpup so I have an idea of how well they handle. It’s my favorite plinker. While I admire the shortness of the 18 inch model, you couldn’t give me a short barrelled anything. I don’t ride around in Humvs and tanks.

I wish 223 fit my requirements better. There are definately a lot of nice guns to choose from. The lighter weight, reduced recoil and ability to carry more ammo is a strong incentive. But I have guns in both calibers and I feel the .308 meets my needs better.

Right now my biggest question is accuracy of the RFB. I don’t expect it to be a target rifle, but I hope it will be accurate enough to use at long range. Especially considering that it’ll be dependant on optical sights for the most part.

Note to Jida: Before you commit to packing that much weight around, please read this article about backpacking with guns. It’s written by someone with a lot of experience at it and is very thought provoking. It changed my mind on several things.

http://www.tacticalgearreview.com/wordpress/2006/07/the-backpack-survivalist-by-mike-rostov-2

My appologies to the mods if posting links is forbidden. You’ll get no complaints from me if you need to delete the link or entire post. Thanks.

1) Good cartridge which has one of the best versatility ranges of any ammo readily available.
2) Interchangable ammo type with a matching bolt gun.
3) Light, compact and out of the way if needed.
4) Left or right hand shooting for clearing corners, great option for left handers.
5) KelTec has a lifetime warranty on all of their firearms and will fix it now or years from now if needed.
6) Avid close community who know the guns better than KelTec in some cases.

Cons:

1) Strong kick which will cause minute of flinch accuracy problems for smaller people.
2) All classic training done for current firearms does not apply to this configuration and can cause some discomfort on safety.
3) Looks and cartridge can confuse people on its purpose and can lead to a let down if purposed incorrectly.

When you start looking at a semi auto in the U.S. you start around $1,000 and then work your way down to the $500’s and up to the $2,000.

If you are fine with 223 then you have many options and configurations to cover a wide array of conditions. You are limiting yourself balistically with this choice but everything else is far more open.

In 308 you have few options for left handed folks, few options for lighter weight, few options for semi auto and few options in carbines.

The thought appears to be that if you are going to go 308 then you are using that round for an expected list of things (long range, game hunting, etc.).

In my case this rifle fits a niche that I cannot currently fill. I am looking at a 3 gun set outside of my hunting gear.

A long range sub MOA rifle, a matching semi auto rifle and a 22 pistol.

The long range rifle is meant for everything outside of self defense. The semi is meant to help in carrying 1 kind of ammo and for self defense in general. The .22 is for ‘quantity’ ammo carrying and as a primary small game getter with low noise output.

If I were to pack all 3 (me being strong and used to larger weights) the long range rifle would be slung, the semi would be packed and the .22 would be in a holster.

To date, I could not match a rifle to the semi, keep the size and weight reasonable and have them in a caliber that was common and versatile.

308 is the right caliber in my opinion. I have no desire to get into a protracted firefight with anyone. I would not carry more than 100 rounds in 308 since it is only to,

1) Shoot big game.
2) Shoot 2 legged game.

Since this would be rare for me in most cases both rifles would be used sparingly. This is also for basic trips and not for ’survival mode’ where you start putting your goods underground and wearing tin foil helmets.

The .22 allows for me to carry 1000 rounds without much worry, most likely 500 at the most. This is the main ’survival’ item and would be used to harvest most game if needed.

With all this written down, and sorry for the length, my goal is maybe the same as some and different than others.

The RFB fills a void which there is currently not a viable option without giving up something else or adding something I do not need.

If for example you pointed at specific components and concerns like Ray did about being able to view into the chamber, I wouldn’t be typing this.

Less one reason, I don’t understand why you have posted here.
You’ve posted negative remarks on a product you have never seen and apparently not read a review on (private owners have, find it yourself).
Gone off topic to recommend products that are not similar, less being a firearm.
You start to sound reasonable then toss in a mock/jab, which leads me to the reason of your posting, even if you don’t believe it.

Your a troll.

I apologize to the others for being the first to feed him. It happens, we get lead in and got defensive over his contempt.

I suggest bfree you find a thread you can be constructive in and not a thorn.
There is no point in responding to bfree as he is not contributing to the topic, just let it go, it’s him, not us.

- don’t make me pull the Internet over -

Good luck with your “Kel-Tec” and make sure you post honest reviews for all fo us to see. I’m anxious to hear the range reviews after giving the weapon a good work out.

My 12 year old thinks it looks “really cool”.

Quite frankly, you haven’t scratched the surface when it comes to compact weapons that are available with an SBR stamp. The SCAR is apparently a good gun, but there are also many other good guns that don’t cost nearly as much, and have much more real world testing. In all reality, you are basing your praise of the SCAR on about as much real world testing as has been seen by the RFB that you speak so bad of.
Also, while I am sure that the FS-2000 is a good gun, I don’t like the ergonomics, so it doesn’t matter how good of a gun it is, I’m not buying it.

“I think the draw to the SBR is the supercial asthetics and a lot of people are ignoring the quality factor of the components and metallurgy.”
Are they ignoring them, or are they just not there? So far, all it seems that you are basing these claims on is that your buddy had a few jambs in a pistol built by keltec, and most of their stuff doesn’t cost enough.
Oh, and by the way, the RFB is not an SBR, that’s one of the main advantages of it.

In one breath you slam Kel-Tec for producing “price point” firearms, whilst complaining previously about the EXPENSIVENESS of the RFB.
As for the M77 – not MK77 – I’ve had more than a few through my hands with problems – even the MkII’s & including some critical safety issues.
The trigger pull can best be described as “robust”……
I think you’ll find that there have been far more 1911’s & Hi-Powers made than Blackhawks of ANY iteration.

Go look on ANY firearm forum & you’ll find people with issues & people with a desire to improve what they have, whether it’s an AR15 or a Webley-Fosberry. That doesn’t mean there’s anything desperately wrong with that maker’s firearms – merely that all mechanical constructs can & do have problems.
I’ve shot pretty much everything from the SMLE to the Barret 82, with M60’s the L7A2 & most modern military small arms in between & I’m telling you that the RFB is built to a high standard – no, NOT that”High Standard”…….;-) – & IMO will prove to be a classic firearm.

PS Don’t tell me about Sig quality – I had the misfortune to while away the hours with a thoroughly recalcitrant 556 at one point

I agree that there are many high quality weapons not sold to the military, KEl-TEC is not one of them.

Go look on every Kel-Tec forum and you’ll see that it’s not uncommon to see a lot of recommendations on how to make your Kel-Tec work better. How to file this down or replace this part to cover some type of problem with the weapon. That’s a big red flag and it’s reflective of KT’s quality control. There is a big difference between 1-10000 firearms having issues vs. 1-100. Y

Normally this boils down to owner pride and no one wants to admit that they’ve made a bonehead choice, especially with weapons…too much macho ego at stake. They then tend to tolerate or ignore the flaws of the weapon.

I hear alot of people say that for the money, Kel-Tec is a great weapon..but what does that really mean? For the money? There’s an implied trade off, better price for less of what? Reliability, accuracy, durability, quality? To me no weapon is worth any price if any of these attributes are comprimised.

I am not comfortable endorsing a weapon made from an 18 year old company with no legacy weapons whatsoever; and with a long history of price point models that have been released to the public with more than their share of bugs.

We all have different standards when it comes to firearms, I’m just afraid Kel-Tec doesn not meet mine.

I look forward to honest reviews of the SBR…if you can prove to me that this weapon can endure combat like testing and reliability and that it has no bugs…SIG SAUER quality…then I’ll consider buying one for my kid.

I think the draw to the SBR is the supercial asthetics and a lot of people are ignoring the quality factor of the components and metallurgy.

The Scar with CQC barrel is a conventional rifle, and while it is as compact as the RFB, it owes it’s compactness to it’s 13″ barrel, which results in reduced ballistics, and the necessity for federal registration. In addition, we are talking about a gun that frequently sells for 5000-6000 dollars for a gun that is pretty similar to the various AR-10 variants or the DSA FAL. Personally, I’d rather have a 12.5″ barreled AR-10 type, or the 13″ DSA and $3000 in other guns and ammo than a SCAR with short barrel.

However, bullpup it is not, and that is what this article is about. As far as bullpups go, neither of FN’s entries are very suitable as a general purpose rifle in my opinion. The FS-2000 is uncomfortable and ungainly, and the PS-90 is chambered for too small of a round, and while it would make a good varmint gun or plinker, that’s about it. Keltec appears to have come the closest to what I want, if they would make it possible to check the chamber without removing the mag, I’d be all over it.

As far as Ruger vs Keltec, the point of this is to show that it is entirely possible for a company to produce high quality weapons, and not be selling them to the military.

And while you have had bad experiences with Keltec, many others have had very good experiences, and highly recommend them. Furthermore, I’d heard bad reviews on Ruger, Colt, HK, FN, Glock, Remington, Mossberg, Kimber, Sig, and pretty much every brand name out there. Just because there are a few bad reviews out there doesn’t mean that they are as bad as is claimed.

If you are really considering an FN take a look at the SCAR-H MK17 in cqc configuration.

Humor me, please don’t compare it to the Kel-Tec. Will someone break down the components, manufacturing process, metallurgy, etc. between the Kel-Tec and the FN BullPup..looks and range report or one thing but IMHO it just looks like another cheap Kel-Tec.

Anyways, now that that is cleared up, back to the issue at hand. I like the idea of bullpups, but to date, nobody seems to have built one without some sort of issue. The majority of bullpups eject out of the right side, making it impossible to fire from the left side. I expect all defensive guns to be ambidextrous, so I can’t see using a side ejecting bullpup. That narrows the field down to the FN FS2000, PS90, and Keltec RFB. I find the FS2000 to be particularly un-ergonomic and bulky, so I’m not inclined to try that. The PS90 shoots a round that is only slightly more powerful than a 22 rimfire, so it wouldn’t be my first choice for anything besides shooting rodents. The Keltec, as I have said before, seems to have no provision to allow you to view directly into the chamber without removing the magazine, and I don’t like that idea. Furthermore, the FS2000 and RFB uses a very complicated action which worries me a little. I could easily get over such worry if the gun proves to be reliable and durable however. If Keltec offered a flap door or some other means to easily check the chamber, I’d probably buy it, because it is everything else that I am looking for- compact size, what appears to be good ergonomics, and high power.

FYI..Ruger has produced more types of sporting firearms than any other firearms manufacturer in the world.

Getting back to the RFB…I can’t wait to see the reviews…make sure you shoot that thing like it’s a loaner, get that barrel red hot and see how those shot groups look, how the weapons functions, etc. Put every type of round through and really put it through it’s paces. Too many reviewers today are recieving heavily discounted or free weapons in return for positive reviews.

I hope it works out for you.

The jamming PA32 doesn’t mean Kel-Tec is junk. I have a P-11 that has over 6,000 rounds through it and it has never had any sort of a malfunction. That’s not an indicator of Kel-Tec as a brand either. It only means that his Kel-Tec jammed and mine doesn’t.

I have a friend who’s dad once had a .30-06 fail ti take down a deer. Both of them are lifelong hunters and excellant shots, but there are other variables such as proper bullet selection. Now they think the .30-06 is worthless on deer. I think we all know better. Anecdotal evidence at it’s finest.

If a company is judged by the occasional dud, then American cars must really be junk. You’d think after all these years they could get it right. Actually, I guess Ferrari would be junk too. They did make the Dino after all.

I had a Colt Targetsman that never worked right. I also had a Para Warthog that went back to Para so many times that I finally just gave up and got rid of it. That doesn’t mean that Colt and Para make junk guns. It just means that either the models I had were crappy, or that I got duds.

But to slam Kel-Tec because they don’t make anything for the military, while recommending Ruger, who doesn’t either, is just hypocritical.

If you don’t like Kel-tec, that’s fine. I own several of their products and have absolutely no complaints about them. They’re a good solid gun at a fair price point. I own a heckuva lot of other brands too, and they compare favorably with any of them.

What determines a guns quality is it’s engineering, materials and manufacturing. If it’s well designed and well executed, why does it matter who makes it? I don’t have my RFB yet, but I have high hopes for it. If it’s a dud, you can bet I’ll be yelling at the top of my lungs on all the boards, trying to make others aware before they waste their money. But if it’s a solid performer, you can bet I’ll be letting people know that too. I don’t care who makes it, only how it’s made.

The Garand is legendary but the M-14 is a direct descendent of the M1. The new and improved son. In the form of the M21 or M25 it is still used in combat to this day.

I have an M-14 and would NEVER give it up.

I’m curious- have you ever pattern tested a shotgun? The longest shot possible in my house is 10 yards. At that range, my shotgun patterns cover roughly 3″. In all reality, there is no difference as far as ease of hitting the target with a 3 inch pattern or a single projectile. With a shotgun, you still need to aim, just the same as with a rifle. The only advantage of the shotgun is that it tends to be more capable of stopping an unarmored threat. Around here, the chances of a home invader having armor is pretty slim. In some areas with a heavy gang presence, they are starting to have reports of well equipped home invasion gangs that wear armor. If I was in one of those places, I would use a rifle for home defense.

“I agree, and I said as much, the .308 is a great deer round, not a great big round gun. Bill would be put in his place by the overwhelming amount of guides in Alaska. Hearing about the 300 meter shot is like hearing “leg” Infantry talk about there road marches with there 65 pound ruck’s…only to weight the ruck at 40lbs…get my drift H?? “The fish was this big”..LOL>”

Personally, I would say that the .308 is a bit bigger than you need for deer. .243 is about right for a dedicated deer gun. .308 on the other hand is a good multipurpose gun that will take deer without too much damage, and has dropped a lot of elk and moose with well placed shots. Many Alaskan guides carry heavier guns because of the threat of bears while hunting, but .308 should be able to take moose if the person behind the gun does their part.

As for 300 yards, that and much longer is done on a regular basis in practical rifle competitions, often using iron sited or red dot equipped rifles. Prior to WWI, the average British infantry soldier was capable of shooting the “mad minute”- using an iron sighted bolt action Enfield rifle, he could hit a target at a range of 300 yards 15 times in one minute, including any loading necessary. In other words, they could make an aimed, 300 yard shot, work the bolt, and be ready for the next shot, all in under 4 seconds. Many soldiers were capable of more than 15 shots. If you don’t think 300 yards with a .308 scoped weapon is possible, you are lost.

“Ray says you have to go to M1A1…come on Ray, how about the good ‘ole M-14 which is still used, effectively I might add, as a sniper rifle..that is a .308 my friend.”
News flash- the M1A is a civilian M14. If you go to Springfield armory and ask for an M14, they will gladly sell you an M1A, which will look, feel, and shoot like an M14. I never said that the M14/M1A is a bad gun, and in fact, I am a big fan of it. And I stand by my statement- the mini-14 and mini-30 are sized down versions of the M14/M1A, and if you want something similar to the mini-14 or mini-30 but in .308, the obvious choice is the M1A

As for why the various military don’t buy Keltec stuff, thats probably mostly to do with the fact that the kind of guns keltec makes aren’t in big demand with the military. For example, small backup guns aren’t really that in demand when backup gun is taken to mean a full size handgun. Neither Marlin nor DSA sell any guns to the military either, does that mean that their quality is lacking?

“Bill…dude…let me tell you that the enemy doesn’t GAF if your .308 and NATO rounds are little hotter or not….MENTAL MASTURBATION doesn’t do much for you in combat.”

I guess I ought to point out that it was yourself who espoused the superiority of the .300Win Mag over the humble .308 Win viz its ability to kill stuff.

As for this:

“Dude, buy it if you want, it’s a cheap POS. I’d be embarrassed to even have it in my firearms vault.“

I’ll tell you this for free & in order to save future embarrassment: I’ve been around military firearms “for a while” in one way or another & a hands on inspection of this firearm is something you evidently haven’t done.
I’d place it AT LEAST equal to the FN F2000 on build quality & robustness & superior to our current service rifle.
Admittedly I cannot compare MRBF & see no need due to the rifle not being in the running for NATO issue.

“When it comes to firearms, there’s a reason that Sig, Beretta, AL, CZ, FN, H&K, blah, blah are all supplying to the military and Kel-Tec ARE NOT.

Think about that.”

How about because they’ve no interest in doing so, or because they’re not presently producing stuff with an eye to the military market?

Or how about the FACT that price is an overriding factor in the military supply process – you surely didn’t think “fit for purpose” was the main guiding factor……….?

I don’t know what your MOS is/was but the Beretta is a bloody AWFUL side-arm with enough problems to rival those of the original L85……..

At ten yards you’re outside the realm of CQC & well outside the range generally involved in an encounter with an intruder.
At that range, OO buck will have a spread of less than 10″ with individual shot having considerably less potential lethality than a single JHP from a handgun.
Once you’ve pushed a bayonet into an Argy conscript’s groin & then pulled the trigger on an L1A1 you might understand how naive I’m not….

…..now THAT is what I call CQC.

Try some trench clearing for real – it makes the bullpup make sense.

Though NOT the 5.56 pill most of them deliver.