Sub 2000 or 2000 Sub

endebt · 10-09-2009, 08:33 PM

Anyone have or had any dealing with one in 40 S&W. Saw one yesterday. It looked like it would make a good tractor gun. It could be folded up in the cab. Any info would be a help. Thanks.

Joe Brainard · 10-09-2009, 09:22 PM

Here's a link to a previous thread on the subject. I don't know anything about them.
http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/kel...-thoughts.html (Sub 2000 Any thoughts??)

jmp8927 · 10-09-2009, 09:25 PM

If you want a folding firearm, you might look into the Kel-Tec SU16s. Kel-Tec SU-16 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As for the SUB 2000, I don't know. Only info I've seen on it is here.Modern Firearms - civilan guns for self-defense, training and hunting - Kel-tec SUB2000 carbine

Big Dog · 10-10-2009, 04:41 PM

From someone who has handled and shot the Sub2000 - unless you really NEED the compact folding feature - avoid it like the plague. Ergonomics utterly suck. No optical sights if you want it to fold. Even short guys with short arms find the pitiful excuse for a 'stock' to be far too short for comfort.

There are far better pistol-caliber carbines available for the money.

EtherialOne · 11-09-2009, 03:48 AM

Haven't played with a sub 2000, but I picked up a used sub 9 (takes SW59 Mags), which is the same only has a steel flat sided receiver instead of the ribbed polymer. I really like it, and the ergonomics IMO are fine for what it is. The thing I like best about the sub 9 is the ease of deployment and portability. It will easily fit in a large backpack folded and if you leave a loaded clip in it you can be ready to fire in under five seconds from a folded position with a little practice. Also when folded most of the inner workings aren't exposed for foreign stuff to get into.. very nice design. At about 80 yds. I was pretty much emptying a clip into about a paper plate sized area standing / leaning against a tree without much effort. The SU16 on the other hand is a Rifle shooting Rifle ammunition. Not in the same class at all. The Cons on it are it's more difficult to deploy (pull pin, unfold, pin stock, put clip in), and when folded both the trigger group and bottom of bolt are open to dirt etc., while the pro's are much more powerful, more accurate, better ergonomics, ability to mount optics, and of course the forgrip deploying into a bipod. At any rate I really like both, but for different reasons and purposes.

10-09-2009, 08:33 PM	#1
endebt Registered User Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Central Texas Posts: 2	Sub 2000 or 2000 Sub Anyone have or had any dealing with one in 40 S&W. Saw one yesterday. It looked like it would make a good tractor gun. It could be folded up in the cab. Any info would be a help. Thanks.

10-09-2009, 09:22 PM	#2
Joe Brainard Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Rhinelander, Wisc. Posts: 478	Here's a link to a previous thread on the subject. I don't know anything about them. http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/kel...-thoughts.html (Sub 2000 Any thoughts??) __________________ You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.--Gospel of John 8:32 NRA Member

10-09-2009, 09:25 PM	#3
jmp8927 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Walterboro, SC Posts: 2,277 Images: 18	If you want a folding firearm, you might look into the Kel-Tec SU16s. Kel-Tec SU-16 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As for the SUB 2000, I don't know. Only info I've seen on it is here.Modern Firearms - civilan guns for self-defense, training and hunting - Kel-tec SUB2000 carbine __________________ Fear not, for I am with you; Be not discouraged, for I am your God.

10-10-2009, 04:41 PM	#4
Big Dog Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tallahassee, Florida Posts: 12,912	From someone who has handled and shot the Sub2000 - unless you really NEED the compact folding feature - avoid it like the plague. Ergonomics utterly suck. No optical sights if you want it to fold. Even short guys with short arms find the pitiful excuse for a 'stock' to be far too short for comfort. There are far better pistol-caliber carbines available for the money. __________________ "A bold spirit embiggens the smallest man!" Jebediah Springfield

11-09-2009, 03:48 AM	#5
EtherialOne Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Rural NC Posts: 48	Have a Sub 9 and like it. Haven't played with a sub 2000, but I picked up a used sub 9 (takes SW59 Mags), which is the same only has a steel flat sided receiver instead of the ribbed polymer. I really like it, and the ergonomics IMO are fine for what it is. The thing I like best about the sub 9 is the ease of deployment and portability. It will easily fit in a large backpack folded and if you leave a loaded clip in it you can be ready to fire in under five seconds from a folded position with a little practice. Also when folded most of the inner workings aren't exposed for foreign stuff to get into.. very nice design. At about 80 yds. I was pretty much emptying a clip into about a paper plate sized area standing / leaning against a tree without much effort. The SU16 on the other hand is a Rifle shooting Rifle ammunition. Not in the same class at all. The Cons on it are it's more difficult to deploy (pull pin, unfold, pin stock, put clip in), and when folded both the trigger group and bottom of bolt are open to dirt etc., while the pro's are much more powerful, more accurate, better ergonomics, ability to mount optics, and of course the forgrip deploying into a bipod. At any rate I really like both, but for different reasons and purposes.