i have both of these now, and i am doing kind of a side by side comparison of them. so far, i have shot about 200 more rounds out of the kel tec than the ruger. my kel tec has had to go back to the factory once. they replaced the slide due to misfires after about 200 rounds. anyway. some of the things i have noticed are: the kel tec has much better checkering and is easier to control than the ruger. the p3at's checkering is "like" it is cut in and the rugers is "like" the old stamped checkering that glenfeild used to use on their rifles. there is something to hold onto, but it is not sharp like the kel-tec's. also, both guns accuracy improves drasticly with the addition of the "finger extension" on the bottom of the magazine. but due to the sharper checkering on the kel tec, it wins the accuracy race, at least in my hands. both guns require "break in" before they will feed and fire without jamming. it can be speeded along with some fine detailing of all the sharp edges. i used a super fine honing stone to remove the sharp edges from both of my pistols. also, for me, i have found it benificial to dismantle the magazines, clean them thouroughly, and coat them with spray on (lyman super moly spray lube ) moly dry lubricant. it allows everything to move much easier, and as an added feature, it draws no dust or lint (like oils can). which can be an important consideration if you are going to pocket carry one of these. this also helps with the feeding and lessens jams during the "break in" period. the sights, while slighly different in actual shape, have the same outline when firing. they really are not much to look at. if someone ever decided to try to target shoot one of these, they would almost have to mill off the little bumps that are there and mount a decent set of sights. of course, for the intended purpose ( very close quarters personal defense) of these little pocket guns, they are about all that is necessary. i must add here though, after the addition of the finger extensions, i did shoot a target about 3' square @ 100 yards with both pistols. i hit 3 out of 6 with both pistols at this range. with the tiny sights and short sight radius, and my novice 50+ year old eyes, i didnt think that was so bad. there has been a lot of talk about ruger simply copying kel tec's p3at. while they do look quite similar, let me assure you there was definatly some engineering used during research and design. there are some parts that bear resemblence to the KT, but they by no means interchange. they are two different pistols. all of this above is just my opinion. i am hoping to clear up any misconceptions of either of these pistols. i will be happy to answer questions about either of them, providing i know the answer. i will not answer smart allec wise cracks, or attacks on my opinions. i simply hope to help someone who is "on the fence" trying to decide wheather he/she wants one of these little giants or not with my own unbiased opinion of each of their performance. i sincerly hope i can.