Tulisan said:
Do you have sources for field test results on the Kel-Tec, that would actually show it's reliability as compared to other pistols? If not, then what makes you think it is unreliable? I am not disagreeing or agreeing with you, and have no vested interest in your answer as I don't own a Kel-Tec; I just like learning where people get their information.
Back when Kel-Tec's first offering, the P11, came out, there were quite a few individuals who found their quality to be either hit or miss (no pun intended). Most were utterly reliable, but some had reliability problems, especially feeding some of the more aggressively profiled hollowpoints.
Most of the feeding problems, though, could be cured with a bit of fluff and buff.
I would imagine that the same might be true for their other offerings, such as the P3-AT, and in this case, mine turned out to be just fine out of the box, while others might need some fluff and buff to get to that same level of reliability. Whether this means simply shooting it more to break it in, or to take it to a gunsmith to have some internal work done, depends from person to person.
I've also owned a Kel-Tec P32, which turned out to be a much more practical carry gun than other pocket pistols in its class, with maybe the exception of the Seecamp. It was more accurate than my Beretta Tomcat .32 ACP, and reliability wasn't a question, whether it was with Gold Dots or the famous .32 ACP Winchester Silvertip. Maybe I'm just lucky when it comes to reliability, but if my P32 and P3-AT can feed aggressively-profiled hollowpoints, in addition to my own handloads, then I feel confident in using these guns as backup weapons.