A Deeper Dive: Setting the Stage
Before we dissect the specific features, let’s establish some foundational knowledge.
The Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0 arrived on the scene as a direct response to the growing demand for compact, easily concealable firearms. This pistol, chambered primarily in .380 ACP, has been designed with the concealed carry market in mind. Its lightweight construction and relatively small dimensions make it an attractive choice for those seeking a discreet personal defense weapon. The Bodyguard 2.0 often incorporates an integrated laser, adding an extra layer of potential target acquisition assistance.
On the other side of the coin, the Glock 42 embodies the renowned reliability and simple design of the Glock brand. Known for its robust construction and user-friendly operation, the Glock 42 also offers a .380 ACP chambering. This pocket-sized Glock represents the brand’s entry into the ultra-compact pistol market. The Glock 42 has quickly become a favorite for those who appreciate Glock’s proven track record and ease of use.
Physical Attributes: Comparing the Builds
The physical characteristics of a handgun are paramount when considering its suitability for concealed carry. The balance between size and usability plays a crucial role in determining the firearm’s overall appeal.
Size and Weight: A Direct Comparison
When comparing size, the Bodyguard 2.0 and the Glock 42 are exceptionally similar, which makes them great options for concealed carry. However, a few minor differences exist. Generally, the Glock 42 tends to be slightly wider and slightly longer than the Bodyguard 2.0. The differences are minimal. While the Glock 42 can sometimes be slightly heavier, the variance is minimal to the point where it is negligible in most scenarios.
Ergonomics and Grip: Feel in the Hand
How a firearm feels in the hand is highly subjective, but a few generalities are worth mentioning. The Glock 42, with its more angular and blocky design, often gives a more solid feel, similar to other Glock models, for the user. The Bodyguard 2.0, on the other hand, frequently presents a slightly more rounded profile, often making it feel more comfortable to some users, especially for those with smaller hands. The Glock’s grip typically features a steeper angle, whereas the Bodyguard 2.0 offers a more common angle.
Frame and Material: Construction Matters
Both firearms typically utilize polymer frames, which are instrumental in keeping their weight down. The polymer construction contributes significantly to the overall durability and resistance to wear and tear. The Bodyguard 2.0 often incorporates a stainless-steel slide, while the Glock 42 utilizes a proprietary steel slide.
Features and Functionality: Delving into the Details
Beyond their physical attributes, several key features dictate a firearm’s overall performance and usability.
Trigger Mechanisms: The Heart of the Operation
The trigger mechanism significantly impacts the user experience. The Bodyguard 2.0 typically features a double-action-only (DAO) trigger. These triggers are known for a longer, heavier pull. For some, this is an advantage; it can add an extra layer of safety because the trigger requires more deliberate effort to fire. The Glock 42, on the other hand, offers a Glock trigger system, with a lighter, shorter, and more consistent pull. This is a single-action-only, striker-fired design.
Sighting Systems: Acquiring the Target
Both pistols usually feature fixed sights. While the specific configurations may vary, both rely on straightforward systems for target acquisition. Sight picture varies between the two models.
Magazine Capacity: The Rounds at Your Disposal
The Glock 42 and the Bodyguard 2.0 offer modest capacities. The Glock 42 generally has a slight advantage in magazine capacity. The difference is not extreme, but the small benefit can be a deciding factor in some situations. Both weapons have a reliable magazine release.
Safety Features: Safeguarding the User
Safety features are of utmost importance. The Bodyguard 2.0 often includes a manual thumb safety, which allows users to physically lock the firearm to prevent accidental discharge. The Glock 42 does not have a manual safety, instead relying on the safe action trigger and other integrated safety mechanisms. The availability of a manual safety can be a deciding factor for individuals who prefer that level of redundant safety.
Integrated Laser: A Tactical Advantage
The Bodyguard 2.0 has been offered with an integrated laser module. These lasers can expedite target acquisition by providing a visible aiming point. While useful, lasers also have drawbacks, such as battery life limitations and the need for regular maintenance.
Performance in the Field: Putting Them to the Test
The ultimate test of any firearm comes in its practical performance.
Accuracy: Hitting the Mark
Both pistols are generally considered accurate enough for their intended role as personal defense weapons. The Glock 42, with its potentially superior trigger, might offer a slight edge in accuracy for some shooters. The Bodyguard 2.0’s trigger may require more practice for those accustomed to lighter triggers, although many users find it quite accurate.
Reliability: Functioning Under Pressure
Reliability is crucial. Both firearms enjoy a solid reputation for functioning reliably. Issues can arise with any firearm. Regular cleaning and proper maintenance are key to maintaining optimal performance.
Recoil and Controllability: Managing the Kick
The .380 ACP cartridge is known for its relatively light recoil. Both pistols are manageable. The grip ergonomics of a specific user also play a role.
Pros and Cons: A Balanced View
Before making a purchase, a clear understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each pistol is essential.
Advantages of the Bodyguard 2.0
- Manual Safety: The presence of a manual safety can be a significant advantage for some users.
- Potentially Lower Price Point: The Bodyguard 2.0 often comes at a more affordable price.
- Integrated Laser (if equipped): Provides a potential advantage for rapid target acquisition.
Disadvantages of the Bodyguard 2.0
- Trigger Pull: The long and heavy trigger pull can be a deterrent for some.
- Magazine Capacity: Magazine capacity may be slightly lower than the Glock 42.
Advantages of the Glock 42
- Reliability: Glock’s reputation for reliability is well-earned.
- Trigger: The Glock trigger offers a lighter and crisper pull.
- Aftermarket Support: A vast array of aftermarket accessories and modifications is available.
Disadvantages of the Glock 42
- Manual Safety: The absence of a manual safety may not appeal to everyone.
- Price: May cost slightly more than the Bodyguard 2.0.
Considering Concealed Carry: Practical Applications
The decision to carry a concealed handgun is a personal one. The Glock 42 and Bodyguard 2.0 are both suitable for concealed carry, but some considerations are important.
Suitability: Matching the Firearm to Your Needs
The size and weight of both guns make them easy to conceal. The grip angle, the presence or absence of a manual safety, and personal preferences all influence the decision.
Carry Methods: Finding the Right Fit
Both firearms are well-suited for a variety of carry methods. Inside-the-waistband (IWB) carry is a popular choice. Pocket carry can also be accommodated due to the relatively small size.
Price and Availability: Making the Purchase
The financial considerations are essential.
Pricing: Weighing the Costs
The Bodyguard 2.0 typically offers a more economical price point. The Glock 42 is often slightly more expensive, although pricing can fluctuate depending on market conditions and retailer.
Availability: Finding Your Firearm
Both firearms are widely available through firearms retailers. Availability can vary based on location and demand, but neither pistol should be particularly difficult to find.
Conclusion: Making the Right Choice
Ultimately, the “best” pocket pistol is a subjective assessment. The Bodyguard 2.0 and the Glock 42 are both high-quality firearms with distinct strengths and weaknesses. The Bodyguard 2.0 is frequently favored for its manual safety, its more affordable price tag, and, sometimes, the availability of an integrated laser. The Glock 42 often appeals to those who appreciate Glock’s reliability, its more refined trigger, and its extensive aftermarket support.
The optimal choice hinges on your unique priorities, shooting experience, and comfort levels. Thoroughly evaluate your needs, carefully examine both firearms, and, if possible, handle and test fire each gun before making your decision. This is not an easy process.
Final Thoughts: Make an Informed Decision
Choosing a concealed carry firearm is a serious decision. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. We hope this comparison has illuminated the features of the Bodyguard 2.0 and the Glock 42. It should aid you in making an informed selection. Research is critical.
Remember to always prioritize responsible gun ownership, including safe handling practices and adherence to all applicable laws.
The ideal path is to handle and, if possible, fire both firearms. This hands-on experience will provide an invaluable understanding of which pistol suits your individual preferences and needs the best.
Before making your decision, consider your level of experience and the environment in which you intend to carry your firearm.
Are there any features or specifications you would like to see discussed further?
