Keltec PLR-16

Discussion in 'General Firearms Discussion' started by MachoMelvin, Oct 1, 2015.

  1. MachoMelvin

    MachoMelvin Well-Known Member

    I've been looking around for a hi cap pistol, pmr-30, Beretta 92, & few others pop up as I look around.. But my eyes keep coming back to the AR pistol. It will be a night stand gun. Does anybody have an opinion or any experience with this gun or its intended use?
     
  2. Dagwood

    Dagwood Supporting Member

    I'm pretty sure it's not a good night stand gun. You don't want to shoot an intruder and gave the bullet go thru three wall an lodge itself in your. Holds room or worse. Shotgun, pistol caliber carbine or just a trusty pistol is prolly the way I would go on that.
     

  3. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    They look neat and I do have a hankering for one, myself.

    But they are a bit larger than the other options. If you're going to go that big, might as well go with a full on AR carbine.

    As far as capability, well, they seem to have similar performance in ballistic gel as other handgun options. Up to 30 rounds is nice.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  4. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    It's as good as any other and better than some.

    Turns out this isn't really a problem. Expanding point .223 Rem ammo fired from a PLR16 penetrates about 12" or so in gel, dumps a ton of energy, and makes some pretty impressive looking wound channels. And you get 30 rounds to do it with.

    http://www.alloutdoor.com/2015/02/23/comparative-performance-rifle-caliber-pistols-part-1-plr16/

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  5. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    What Kirk said...turns out .223 penetrates well on meat, but not so well on walls and such. That's why SWAT entry teams are all using M-4 type weapons these days, instead of the 9mm sub-guns.;)
     
  6. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    My buddy had the PLR-22...it was a terrible gun. It's too big for a pistol, you can't really hold it up and aim; too small for a rifle, so short you could easily put your off hand in front of the muzzle, but....yes, it's a good gun to have, especially in .223.:p

    The problem is, you can actually FIND and get a "real" AR pistol for about the same, or less money.;)
     
  7. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    With the added bonus of that Buffer Tube sticking out it's butt.

    Another thing I never thought of which the above referenced article points out is that the PLR16 allows you to sight it as you would a pistol whereas with the other two which he tested the sights required a cheek weld to sight properly, similar to a rifle.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  8. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    Which makes them more accurate than the PLR.;)

    Seriously...try holding that 3.4 lb behemoth out like a pistol, even with two hands, it wanders all over.:rolleyes:


    Which lets you have a place to get a cheek weld, or mount that "Brace", and actually hit what you are shooting at....;)
     
  9. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    My understanding is that the PLR16 is intended to use with a sling so that you can get a push tension "brace."

    I agree that trying to steady something that heavy for accurate shooting is hard. On the other hand, you just need pie-plate sized hits at 25 feet for in-home-defense. :)

    For that matter, post-WWII Fairbairn style U.S. Army "Instinctive Shooting" training emphasized that wandering hits as an advantage, suggesting that you're more likely to hit something vital if your shots spread out a bit instead of putting them all in the same hole. (Which seems like a bit of hand-waving to me, to be honest.)

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  10. Dagwood

    Dagwood Supporting Member

    I just re-read my post. I should have proofed it before I posted it. I thought I was reading a post from moonzy lol
     
  11. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    I struck again
     
  12. Kiln

    Kiln Member

    3,092
    4
    The PLR16 is a terrible choice for an inside defensive weapon. It is so loud you should double up on hearing protection OUTDOORS. Inside it is practically guaranteed to cause permanent hearing damage so unless you have a really naggy partner living there, it's probably not worth it.

    Add the massive fireball that would definitely blind you at night time and it begins to look even worse. Look around on KTOG before buying one, it is what dissuaded me from picking one up. The receiver is also plastic and sometimes fails near the back.

    I'd pick up a handgun with 16+ rounds, stick the spare mag within reach and voila, you have 30 rounds readily available. I bought a TP9SA today for about $360 OTD and disabled the decocker in about six minutes. The trigger is also, not exagerrating, the best trigger I've ever seen.
     
  13. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    9mm < .223....

    just saying.;)
     
  14. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member


    Unless it's in a revolver
     
  15. Kiln

    Kiln Member

    3,092
    4
    Especially true when it comes to hearing loss when firing indoors. Bad guys don't wait for you to dig the earplugs out. Just saying.
     
  16. Think1st

    Think1st Supporting Member

    8,724
    2,194
    Florida
    Yeah, surviving a hostile encounter with all of your senses intact is a pretty ideal outcome. It would suck to survive but suffer a self-inflicted burst eardrum. The best outcome is to survive with no injuries, either inflicted by the bad guy or oneself.
     
  17. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    Yeah..surviving but losing your hearing is FAR worse than keeping your hearing but not surviving because your weak 9 mm didn't stop the threat.

    Wait...what? That ain't right...:confused:

    And THAT is why suppressors should be legal, dang it.:mad:
     
  18. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    SCOTUS: Sir, so your reasoning behind wanting to make suppressors legal in all 50 states and available without a tax stamp is so you can hear the officers after you defend yourself from an intruder?

    Ajole: Yes.

    SCOTUS: .....
     
  19. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,497
    10,706
    NE Utah
    Congress and POTUS: Can't we just have a common sense discussion about guns?

    Ajole: No, as you have no common sense. If you had common sense, you'd be buying them yourselves.:cool:
     
  20. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    15,727
    5,429
    Vermont
    Fixed it for ya.