Ron J; I'm late to this thread, but I'm curious - what flavor of p220 is yours? I'm asking because I am constantly carrying one of two guns - either my P3AT (which I've had zero problems with, thank God) or my P220 Compact. It's not a pocket gun, but then again - it's not a pocket gun, y'know?
If yours is a full-size 220, I'd take a good look at the compact. It's a bit smaller, but a lot more comfortable to carry, and easier to conceal. For me, anyway... YMMV.
Good luck with Ruger.
I have heard that the new Kel-Tec's seem to have the bugs worked out. First consideration for a carry gun is reliability. Like Solid said, if he can't have faith in his Ruger he can't carry it. While I am sure that Ruger will have a high percentage of LCP guns that exceed expectations, it just takes one time to fail to lose faith. Solid has given the LCP a couple of shots and that's more that fair. With that being said, the folks at Ruger are smart enough to understand that when they lose a customer, it costs them 7x in working marketing dollars to get that customer back. They don't want to lose customers so I would bet on them making it right.
I have two full size P220's (one is a mint condition Browning BDA that I bought new in 1978). Because I have been shooting this "platform" for 30 years, it's a very natural gun to me. Have yet to hold a P220 Compact but I did find a gun store that has some brand new P245's which is actually a little smaller than the P220 Compact (no beavertail). Very tempting. Adding to the confusion, a SIG P229 is slightly shorter in length and slightly taller in height to a P220 Compact or P245 BUT has twice the mag capacity (albeit a 9mm vs. 45ACP). Tough decision!
If it wasn't for the internal lock on the S&W revolvers, I would have a S&W MP 340 revolver on my hip or pocket today. Read TOO many posts at the S&W Forum to make that a reliable carry. Given the amount of favorable press the P239 has received over the years, I am leaning towards that flavor of SIG.