S&W Bodyguard 2.0

[BrazosbyNemo]

Which magazine loader did you get?

I ordered the same one Nightlord40k put up a link off Amazon.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Thanks. I just ordered a couple!

I've been using a standard UpLula as a mag loader, and it has served well.
Moon

 

[BrazosbyNemo]

I ordered the same one Nightlord40k put up a link off Amazon.

I got the Bodyguard 2.0 specific mag loader ($13’ish) from Amazon today. Same one as Nightlord40 posted the link to above. It works great and can easily load the mags to full capacity. The take away is if you buy a 2.0 then spend $13 on the mag loader off Amazon. Problem solved.

 

[halfmoonclip]

I got the Bodyguard 2.0 specific mag loader ($13’ish) from Amazon today. Same one as Nightlord40 posted the link to above. It works great and can easily load the mags to full capacity. The take away is if you buy a 2.0 then spend $13 on the mag loader off Amazon. Problem solved.

If you don't already have a Lula, $13 is cheaper than $30-odd for the Lula. Of course, the Lula works on other things, and I already had a couple.
Moon

 

[vanfunk]

I have to get one of those BG2.0 Lulas; ‘til then my left thumb will continue to look like a fiddler crab’s arm from cramming that last round in there.

My BG2.0 continues to impress me and instill confidence. I do carry other guns from time to time for different applications, but the BG is my constant companion.

 

[actionexpress]

I have to get one of those BG2.0 Lulas; ‘til then my left thumb will continue to look like a fiddler crab’s arm from cramming that last round in there.

I bought a 2.0 the day they released last summer. The wife bought one a week later. I had told her that we'd leave a mag loaded to break in, a local place had some extra mags in stock pretty quickly. We forgot about it, left it in a drawer when we left WI for six months until we came back from our winter home in FL today. The 12th round now goes in with ease..lol

Oh, and we have a Fiddler crab colony on part of our property, the state won't allow any development of the area. They are cool, kinda 2.0 sized themselves.

 

[BrazosbyNemo]

I bought a 2.0 the day they released last summer. The wife bought one a week later. I had told her that we'd leave a mag loaded to break in, a local place had some extra mags in stock pretty quickly. We forgot about it, left it in a drawer when we left WI for six months until we came back from our winter home in FL today. The 12th round now goes in with ease..lol

Oh, and we have a Fiddler crab colony on part of our property, the state won't allow any development of the area. They are cool, kinda 2.0 sized themselves.

I am curious to see how the mags loosen up after being fully loaded for a few weeks. I would like for my daughter to be able to load, or mostly load the mags without a mag load tool. She now has a mag load tool so it will be ok. I think this pistol just needs some breaking in while watching tv. Work the slide, trigger, and safety while you are just sitting around to break everything in. This pistol is much better in the week I have had it. When I got it I thought the safety would be unusable. Sitting here tonight it works pretty well. If I did have one design change it would be making the safety lever longer. It looks like they have plenty of room to do so externally. I really haven’t studied the internal aspects of the safety, how it’s removed, etc to see if that is the reason they made the safety lever so tiny.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Got home for the weekend and unpacked the magazine loaders I ordered from Amazon. Two...one for me, one for my daughter.

They work like a champ...got that 12th round in, no problem!

It'll be a while before we get to the range again... I'm leaving them fully loaded until then.

And hers shoots right at point of aim, so I'm the only one that needs the front sight adjusted.

 

[actionexpress]

I am curious to see how the mags loosen up after being fully loaded for a few weeks. I would like for my daughter to be able to load, or mostly load the mags without a mag load tool. She now has a mag load tool so it will be ok. I think this pistol just needs some breaking in while watching tv. Work the slide, trigger, and safety while you are just sitting around to break everything in. This pistol is much better in the week I have had it. When I got it I thought the safety would be unusable. Sitting here tonight it works pretty well. If I did have one design change it would be making the safety lever longer. It looks like they have plenty of room to do so externally. I really haven’t studied the internal aspects of the safety, how it’s removed, etc to see if that is the reason they made the safety lever so tiny.

Have had our 2.0s for nearly a year and they've loosened up a bit. Have had Shield 1.0s and Plus models with safety, and don't even bother with them. Same part, same design.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Have had our 2.0s for nearly a year and they've loosened up a bit.

The 2.0 mags are a mystery. They do get a little easier to load, but, like, the P365, you're packing 7lbs of poo in a 5lb sack. Hand loading a magazine will never be easy.
The other mystery is capacity. Some 10 rounders willingly accept 10, with room to spare. Others will barely accept 10 (barely!), and are extremely difficult to lock in against a closed slide. This will not change with time; it's a clearance issue.
If your mags hold the advertised, say thank you. The ones that barely hold 10 will work fine, if loaded and run from an open slide.
Moon

 

[actionexpress]

Haven't had magazine issues for quite a while now. New, they're a PITA, but time and use has helped. I don't have to fuss over them anymore.

 

[halfmoonclip]

I don't have to fuss over them anymore.

Will your magazines all hold the advertised number of rounds, with a little to spare for seating in the pistol against a closed slide?
My early magazines actually seemed to seat more easily, compared to the more recent ones.
Moon

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Will your magazines all hold the advertised number of rounds, with a little to spare for seating in the pistol against a closed slide?
My early magazines actually seemed to seat more easily, compared to the more recent ones.
Moon

I can get 10 and 12 into all my respective magazines- and seat them with a good whack- but the whole system just seems happier with them downloaded by one, so that's how I carry it.

 

[Boom Vang]

In the interests of research, I selected a 2.0 with the least worst combination of parts from several at the LGS. Quite an inconsistent pistol, they all varied in trigger feel/grit, slide racking force and TS safety stiffness. On one example the TS could not be moved by any of the LGS staff. S&W at it's usual.



The paddle trigger safety is disturbing, as it it WIDER than the trigger itself. The trigger can be pulled without full finger contact, merely by catching the outside edge of the paddle. That's not my idea of a trigger safety on a pre-cocked striker fired pistol. Glad I have the TS version, and would not carry it without the TS engaged. I ended up later reducing the width of the paddle, make it flush with the outside edge of the trigger.



The TS was notably annoying, covered in very sharp steel diamonds. As was the take down lever and the mag catch. Who's idea of a CCW pistol was this? Spent 2-3 hours dehorning the parts - had to use files as stones and sandpaper wouldn't do anything. TS was very stiff - as smoothed out over 3 range sessions. Due to the small dimensions of the pistol, the TS is not easily disengaged while in a firing grip.... this is a slow system.





Few holsters not specifically made for the 2.0 work, due to the unique dimensions and extended mag catch, which released the magazine in every single instance of trying to use an on-hand holster. Again, an extended mag catch is not really a sound nor necessary feature on a CCW gun designed for IWB and pocket. It's as if this was an IPSC shooters idea of what a pocket gun should be.



Sights are ridiculous. It's like looking at a football being kicked between the goalposts. XS sights at more than 1/3 the price of the pistol are a non-starter. The 2.0 and OG rear dovetails are identical - put an inexpensive and available OG rear sight with proper notch width on the 2.0, and accuracy good out to 50 feet.

Before


After


The magazines are pretty easy to load for a double-stack. No loader necessary.

With the improved rear sight, the pistol shot fairly well in initial testing. Recoil is moderate.


Fired a 50 Foot Modified Bullseye. Tried various POA - 6 o'clock or center hold worked best.


Moved on to a 10 yard combat-style course under time limits, and it shot right on the money. Need to wring it out at 25 yards at the outdoor range.

Mine was 100% reliable over 250 rounds. Still not sure what to think of it.... I'd rather not have to manipulate a tiny poorly placed thumb safety during a draw from a pocket. In any kind of IWB or OWB holster, a larger gun is just as easily concealed.

Rather have the OG Bodyguard 380 in a pocket.

 

[CajunBass]

I bought one a while back and loved it. It was the best feeling gun I'd handled in a long time. The problem was I couldn't hit squat with it. I shot it to the left no matter what. And it was ME, not the gun. If I shot it rested, from the bench, it shot to the sights. If I shot it with a laser cartridge, same thing. Straight to the sights. Stand up and fire live rounds...left. I tried various and sundray things, but I always shot that gun to the left. I guess it just didn't fit ME for some reason. I went back to a 380 EZ which is a bigger gun that must fit my hand better and my shooting improved and it is now my EDC. I may even buy another if I see a PC model in the used case. I almost never buy a "new" gun, but that BG-2 was an exception. A Glock 42 I had no trouble with either, that's a shooting little trick and I'm far from a Glock fanboy, but I like that one. THAT BG-2 just didn't like me I guess. I might try another one one of these days. I LIKE the gun. I'm convinced it was just ME.

That was sort of rambling I guess, but all you who like your BG-2's are encouraging me. Enjoy them!

 

[halfmoonclip]

I don't have to fuss over them anymore.

Will your magazines all hold the advertised number of rounds, with a little to spare for seating in the pistol against a closed slide?
My early magazines actually seemed to seat more easily, compared to the more recent ones.
Moon

 

[halfmoonclip]

After

This was the route I followed, and finally gave up on the (rather dim) nightsight, and gave it a dab of white paint instead. Makes a great sight picture, even in lousy light. Why Smith chose not to use the original, BG1.0 rear sight is simply a mystery.
Moon

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

@Boom Vang

"The paddle trigger safety is disturbing, as it it WIDER than the trigger itself. The trigger can be pulled without full finger contact, merely by catching the outside edge of the paddle. That's not my idea of a trigger safety on a pre-cocked striker fired pistol."

Trigger safeties are a drop safe design feature. They're not meant to be any other kind of safety. They're not manual safeties, they're not safeties which prevent the triggers from being actuated unless they're intentionally pulled. Assigning it safety characteristics beyond what it was designed for does not make it a safety with those other characteristics.

Anything that gets into a trigger guard that can apply a force on the trigger has the potential to do so via the drop safe feature on the trigger. This is why a properly designed and fitted holster is essential to any handgun, whether it has a "trigger safety" or not.


"The TS was notably annoying, covered in very sharp steel diamonds. As was the take down lever and the mag catch. Who's idea of a CCW pistol was this? Spent 2-3 hours dehorning the parts - had to use files as stones and sandpaper wouldn't do anything. TS was very stiff - as smoothed out over 3 range sessions. Due to the small dimensions of the pistol, the TS is not easily disengaged while in a firing grip.... this is a slow system."

It definitely takes some getting used to. As I mentioned before, I cycled the bejeebers out of it (100 cycles, straight from the box, sitting in my car after I bought it) and it loosed up quite a bit. Cycled it an additional 100 times when I was in the field strip/clean/lube stage when I got home. It was much better. I can easily disengage the safety with my shooting hand thumb only, though I'm sure there are others out there who still might not like it. Fortunately for them, the option of carrying it with the safety off is pretty much the same as buying the version without the safety, if that's what they're interested in.


"Sights are ridiculous. It's like looking at a football being kicked between the goalposts. XS sights at more than 1/3 the price of the pistol are a non-starter. The 2.0 and OG rear dovetails are identical - put an inexpensive and available OG rear sight with proper notch width on the 2.0, and accuracy good out to 50 feet."

I don't have a problem with the stock sights. However, I do like your replacement one and may look into that myself. Thanks.


"Few holsters not specifically made for the 2.0 work, due to the unique dimensions and extended mag catch, which released the magazine in every single instance of trying to use an on-hand holster. Again, an extended mag catch is not really a sound nor necessary feature on a CCW gun designed for IWB and pocket. It's as if this was an IPSC shooters idea of what a pocket gun should be."

This doesn't bother me because I don't go for holsters not specifically made for the pistols I'm going to carry. It's long been my experience, and opinion, that a properly fitted holster is far better than a generic holster. I'm not thinking the magazine catch is all the "extended", but since you mentioned it, I'll take a closer look at mine...and especially as applied to the carry holster I've ordered. It would really suck to reach for my pistol in a time of need and have the magazine end up missing. Thanks for that insight.

 

[Boom Vang]

"The paddle trigger safety is disturbing, as it it WIDER than the trigger itself. The trigger can be pulled without full finger contact, merely by catching the outside edge of the paddle. That's not my idea of a trigger safety on a pre-cocked striker fired pistol."

Trigger safeties are a drop safe design feature. They're not meant to be any other kind of safety. They're not manual safeties, they're not safeties which prevent the triggers from being actuated unless they're intentionally pulled. Assigning it safety characteristics beyond what it was designed for does not make it a safety with those other characteristics.

Anything that gets into a trigger guard that can apply a force on the trigger has the potential to do so via the drop safe feature on the trigger. This is why a properly designed and fitted holster is essential to any handgun, whether it has a "trigger safety" or not.
...

Let me address this first, as this is a common misconception. The modern trigger safety originated with the striker-fired Glock pistol. It indeed does function to prevent inertial trigger movement if the pistol is dropped and lands on the rear of the slide or grip.

HOWEVER... that is not it's only function. From the current Glock Manual (page 7):

1. Trigger Safety: The trigger safety is a lever incorporated into the trigger (26). When the trigger safety is in the forward position it blocks the trigger from moving rearward. The trigger safety and the trigger must be fully depressed at the same time to fire the pistol. If the trigger safety is not depressed, the trigger will not move rearward and allow the pistol to fire. The trigger safety is designed to protect against firing if the pistol is dropped or the trigger is subjected to lateral pressure. [emphasis added]​

According to the manufacturer, the trigger safety has TWO functions. The later is important for safe carry and holstering of a striker fired pistol with no manual safety.

In a striker fired pistol with no manual safety, the trigger safety acts as a safety against accidental discharge if the trigger is contacted with side pressure - as during drawing, holstering, or flopping around in a pocket, bag or "universal" holster. Especially on the 2.0, the trigger everyone because it is short and light, benefits from a properly designed trigger safety.

The "traditional" blade-style was replaced with a soft-fingers-friendly paddle style, which reduces the secondary function. And making it wider than the trigger itself further reduces it's function. Part of this is sloppy tolerance as the safety has lateral movement as well. While this is perhaps acceptable on a target or competition pistol, it's wrong on a small concealment gun.

Under stress, forgetfulness, lack of training/knowledge, etc... carrying and especially holstering of loaded handguns can result in less than perfect diligence. I personally would not carry this pistol without the TS engaged.

You make some other very good points. The TS can be trained with. But on a pistol that I think requires it, it could have been better executed. As I haven't carried the 2.0 yet - lacking a suitable holster - I can't speak to whether the extended mag catch is a problem. But many many people use the cheapest "universal" style holsters available, and in my view they are problematic with the 2.0. This is simply an unforced error by S&W - there is no need for an extended mag catch or super-wide paddle trigger safety on a small concealment pistol.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Let me address this first, as this is a common misconception. The modern trigger safety originated with the striker-fired Glock pistol. It indeed does function to prevent inertial trigger movement if the pistol is dropped and lands on the rear of the slide or grip.

HOWEVER... that is not it's only function. From the current Glock Manual (page 7):

1. Trigger Safety: The trigger safety is a lever incorporated into the trigger (26). When the trigger safety is in the forward position it blocks the trigger from moving rearward. The trigger safety and the trigger must be fully depressed at the same time to fire the pistol. If the trigger safety is not depressed, the trigger will not move rearward and allow the pistol to fire. The trigger safety is designed to protect against firing if the pistol is dropped or the trigger is subjected to lateral pressure. [emphasis added]​

According to the manufacturer, the trigger safety has TWO functions. The later is important for safe carry and holstering of a striker fired pistol with no manual safety.

In a striker fired pistol with no manual safety, the trigger safety acts as a safety against accidental discharge if the trigger is contacted with side pressure - as during drawing, holstering, or flopping around in a pocket, bag or "universal" holster. Especially on the 2.0, the trigger everyone because it is short and light, benefits from a properly designed trigger safety.

The "traditional" blade-style was replaced with a soft-fingers-friendly paddle style, which reduces the secondary function. And making it wider than the trigger itself further reduces it's function. Part of this is sloppy tolerance as the safety has lateral movement as well. While this is perhaps acceptable on a target or competition pistol, it's wrong on a small concealment gun.

Under stress, forgetfulness, lack of training/knowledge, etc... carrying and especially holstering of loaded handguns can result in less than perfect diligence. I personally would not carry this pistol without the TS engaged.

You make some other very good points. The TS can be trained with. But on a pistol that I think requires it, it could have been better executed. As I haven't carried the 2.0 yet - lacking a suitable holster - I can't speak to whether the extended mag catch is a problem. But many many people use the cheapest "universal" style holsters available, and in my view they are problematic with the 2.0. This is simply an unforced error by S&W - there is no need for an extended mag catch or super-wide paddle trigger safety on a small concealment pistol.

What you printed from the Glock Manual is exactly what it is...a drop safety.

"Lateral" means "from the side". Triggers aren't designed to actuate their triggering function laterally, period. With or without a trigger safety incorporated, the trigger is designed to operate axially (with the frame) only. Back and forth. To get the trigger to move back, a portion of the force applied MUST act axially towards the rear to accomplish this...and that means on the face of the trigger. And guess where the trigger safety is mounted to be actuated? On the face of the trigger.

The current wording, from their website, is:

"The trigger safety is designed to prevent the pistol from firing if it’s dropped or if the trigger is subjected to any pressure that isn’t a direct firing pull."

Much like the wording you posted above, of course. The wording has shifted a bit over the decades, from my past research. Which leads me to believe they tweeked the wording for commercial/marketing purposes. Well, they're in the business of selling firearms, so more power to them.

Most people focus on the trigger safety, of course, because it's the most obviously visible part of their drop safety design.

But there is also safety in redundance, so Glocks have two other safety mechanisms built in. They have a "firing pin safety", which physically blocks the firing pin from moving forward until the trigger is started to be pulled. And then there's the "drop safety", which involves the trigger bar. The trigger bar must move down to allow the release of the firing pin.

They are ALL drop safety measures, designed to ensure that the ONLY thing that can cause the pistol to fire is the direct movement of the trigger in a rearward direction with the most likely means of cause being the action of a finger on the trigger. However, anything which enters between the trigger guard and the face of the trigger MAY act to cause the trigger to actuate and thus fire the gun. Which means it's not a true "safety" which can be engaged to prevent any firing of the weapon.

From an engineering stand point, this is EXACTLY what their safety system is...a drop safe design. No more, no less. Words used to describe these features can lead people to believe whatever it is they wish to believe, most especially if it helps sales.


"In a striker fired pistol with no manual safety, the trigger safety acts as a safety against accidental discharge if the trigger is contacted with side pressure - as during drawing, holstering, or flopping around in a pocket, bag or "universal" holster. Especially on the 2.0, the trigger everyone because it is short and light, benefits from a properly designed trigger safety."

No amount of safety mechanisms will ensure against individual stupidity, such as "flopping around in a pocket, bag, or 'universal' holster". A proper holster is absolutely essential to one's safety posture when carrying a handgun. It protects any manual safety from inadvertently disengaging, keeps "stuff" out of the trigger guard that shouldn't be there, and secures the pistol in place against unwanted movement. EDIT: And no "side pressure" causes the trigger to move backwards. Whatever the pressure is, whatever its source, it's a force vector applied in the rearward direction that actuates the trigger. NOT "side pressure".

And oh, yes...you very much hit on some positives for the BG 2.0. It's indeed short and light!


"Under stress, forgetfulness, lack of training/knowledge, etc... carrying and especially holstering of loaded handguns can result in less than perfect diligence. I personally would not carry this pistol without the TS engaged."

Absolutely. But then...this ought to be considered as truth at face value by anybody who chooses to carry a firearm. It IS dangerous and this MUST be respected. Consequences of screwing up can be very serious, indeed.


"The TS can be trained with. But on a pistol that I think requires it, it could have been better executed. As I haven't carried the 2.0 yet - lacking a suitable holster - I can't speak to whether the extended mag catch is a problem. But many many people use the cheapest "universal" style holsters available, and in my view they are problematic with the 2.0. This is simply an unforced error by S&W - there is no need for an extended mag catch or super-wide paddle trigger safety on a small concealment pistol."

Yeah, I think the safety could be quite a bit better. Even a low profile safety could have been designed to operate better than this one.

As for people and holsters...I escapes me why, after spending X amount of money, so many people seem to think not also investing in a decent holster is somehow anathema. It's only the price of a few boxes of ammo, when you think about it. I'm waiting for one I ordered a week or two ago from TT Gun Leather, at $145. Heck, a typical box of 50 rounds of .380 ammo at, say, PSA, runs what...$27 give or take? So the holster cost less than 6 boxes of ammo.

Small price to pay for doing things the right way when the consequences are considered.

Anyway, when my holster comes in, I'll be sure to post my opinion on these factors, especially with respect to the magazine release you brought up.

 

[kidneyboy]

Based on the commentary in this thread I rented one today. Nice pistol and one of the best handling micro 380s I have shot, the Sig 238 being the other. Very accurate for what it is and for its intended purpose. The only negative for me is the trigger guard beats the crap out of the first knuckle on my trigger finger which may be a deal breaker. I'll rent it again and see if there is a handling workaround.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Some ingenious American will invent an aftermarket manual safety lever that's superior to the OEM one.

 

[vanfunk]

@Boom Vang ’s post is fascinating. I don’t doubt your experience in the least, but what’s amazing is that I experience none of those problems. I don’t think the BG 2.0 is perfect but it’s the best carry gun I’ve had in 35 years of EDC. As always, these choices are SO personal.

 

[kidneyboy]

Some ingenious American will invent an aftermarket manual safety lever that's superior to the OEM one.

The safety on the 2.0 operates just like the one on my Shield+. Easy to swipe off. Not as easy to engage. I'm ok with that.
I took the Shield with me today to compare that, among other things.

 

[Slytherin]

Mine shoots great. Well other than I had to adjust the sight because it was several inches off from factory.

As nice as it is all around, I don’t foresee it overtaking my PMR30 for woods carry.

I’d probably use hard cast or Lehigh penetrators just to be sure I was getting the penetration for woods carry though.