Introduction
Concealed carry is a significant responsibility, but the desire for self-defense often drives individuals to find the right tools for the job. Pocket pistols have surged in popularity, offering a discreet and accessible means of personal protection. These compact firearms prioritize concealability, making them ideal for everyday carry where discretion is paramount. Among the crowded field of pocket pistols, two prominent contenders consistently capture attention: the Glock 42 and the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0. This article delves into a comprehensive comparison of these two firearms, examining their features, performance, and suitability for concealed carry. By analyzing their strengths and weaknesses, we aim to provide you with the information necessary to make an informed decision, potentially helping you choose the perfect companion for personal safety.
Background and Specifications
Understanding the basics is crucial. Before we dissect the nuances of each pistol, it’s important to grasp their fundamental specifications. These baseline characteristics provide a framework for our subsequent evaluations.
Glock 42
Let’s begin with the Glock 42. This firearm represents Glock’s foray into the realm of pocket-sized .380 ACP pistols. Though smaller than its larger siblings, the Glock 42 retains the core DNA of the Glock brand. It features the same polymer frame, familiar Safe Action trigger system, and overall robust construction that has made Glock a household name in the firearms community. Chambered in .380 ACP, it offers a balance between manageable recoil and potent stopping power. Its capacity, including a round in the chamber, is generally seven rounds, offering adequate firepower in a compact package. The Glock 42 prioritizes simplicity, ease of operation, and reliability, making it an appealing option for both novice and experienced shooters.
Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0
Shifting our focus, the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0 embodies Smith & Wesson’s dedication to creating ultra-concealable firearms. Building on the original Bodyguard design, the 2.0 variant introduced significant improvements, addressing some of the criticisms leveled at its predecessor. Like the Glock 42, it’s chambered in the .380 ACP, maximizing the balance between stopping power and the size constraints of the firearm. The Bodyguard 2.0 shares its capacity of seven rounds, which, combined with its compact dimensions, renders it a very practical choice for concealed carry. The notable characteristic of the Bodyguard 2.0 is its double-action-only (DAO) trigger system and often includes an integrated laser sight, offering the user a more comprehensive platform.
Features Comparison
The differences in construction are subtle but impact the overall experience. One of the more obvious aspects to examine in a thorough comparison is the feature set, which can make or break the utility of a concealed carry firearm.
Frame and Grip
Considering the exterior, the Glock 42 boasts a frame and grip constructed from polymer. This material contributes to the pistol’s light weight and resistance to corrosion. The grip, although relatively slim, generally provides a comfortable and secure hold for most hands. The texturing on the Glock 42’s grip is designed to aid the user in obtaining a firm grasp, especially in high-stress situations or adverse weather conditions. However, it is not as aggressive as some of Glock’s larger models, which is necessary for a compact firearm.
Conversely, the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0 also utilizes a polymer frame and grip. The grip ergonomics are notably different, often feeling slightly slimmer in the hand compared to the Glock 42. The Bodyguard 2.0’s grip texture often leans towards being slightly more aggressive, designed to offer a more positive grasp, which can be a benefit considering its compact size.
Sights
Sights, though often overlooked, are critical for accurate shooting. Glock typically employs fixed, three-dot sights on the 42. These sights offer a clear and straightforward sight picture, with white dots aiding in quick target acquisition. The simplicity of this system minimizes any potential for snagging during the draw. The sight picture is often praised for its ease of use, especially for those accustomed to Glock firearms.
The Bodyguard 2.0 also has fixed sights, although these are often smaller and less pronounced than those of the Glock 42. This is a conscious design choice to promote concealability. Some Bodyguard 2.0 models integrate a laser sight, adding a valuable aiming assist tool. While the laser can significantly improve target acquisition, especially in low-light environments, it also requires batteries and must be carefully aligned.
Controls
Moving on to the controls, their placement and ease of use are factors that influence handling efficiency. The Glock 42 features Glock’s signature magazine release, typically positioned on the left side of the frame, which allows for easy operation with the thumb of a dominant hand. The slide release, located on the left side of the frame, is also relatively accessible. The Glock 42 eschews a manual safety, relying on the built-in Safe Action trigger system to prevent accidental discharge. This design philosophy prioritizes quick access and ease of use.
The Bodyguard 2.0, in contrast, features a magazine release in a similar position as the Glock. However, some Bodyguard 2.0 models are equipped with a manual safety, usually located on the left side of the frame, requiring the shooter to consciously disengage it before firing. The slide release is relatively easy to access, but it might be somewhat smaller in the case of some models. The presence of a manual safety is a point of contention among concealed carriers. Some appreciate the added safety, while others consider it an unnecessary step that could slow down the draw and firing process.
Trigger
Then there’s the trigger, which is a fundamental aspect of the shooting experience. The Glock 42 features the Safe Action trigger, known for its consistent pull and relatively light weight. This trigger system offers a crisp break and a short reset, promoting rapid follow-up shots. The feel is generally considered smooth and predictable.
The Bodyguard 2.0, with its DAO trigger, presents a different experience. The trigger pull is typically longer and heavier than that of the Glock 42. This heavier pull is designed to prevent accidental discharges and requires more deliberate and consistent finger pressure. The longer reset period can impact the speed of follow-up shots.
Performance and Reliability
Performance is not just about aesthetics; it’s about how well the pistol handles in real-world conditions. Range time and real-world shooting experiences help reveal a firearm’s true character.
Accuracy
Accuracy is a crucial factor in any self-defense situation. The Glock 42 often demonstrates a respectable level of accuracy. Shooters often find it easy to achieve respectable groups at typical defensive distances. The sight picture and the smooth trigger contribute to accuracy, making it relatively easy to place shots on target quickly.
The Bodyguard 2.0, due to its smaller sights and heavier trigger pull, may require more practice to master. While it is accurate enough for personal protection, shooters may find it more challenging to achieve tight groupings, particularly at longer distances. The integrated laser sight, if present, can significantly improve accuracy by providing a visible aiming point.
Recoil and Muzzle Rise
Recoil and muzzle rise are essential to consider in a .380 ACP pistol. The Glock 42, with its slightly larger frame and heavier weight compared to some pocket pistols, typically exhibits manageable recoil. Muzzle rise is controlled effectively, allowing for rapid follow-up shots. This contributes to a better overall shooting experience, as the user can stay on target easier.
The Bodyguard 2.0, being lighter and more compact, tends to have a slightly snappier recoil. Muzzle rise, while not excessive, is more noticeable compared to the Glock 42. This difference in recoil can make follow-up shots slightly more challenging, especially for shooters new to the .380 ACP cartridge.
Reliability
Reliability is paramount in a defensive firearm. Glock has built a reputation for reliability, and the Glock 42 largely upholds that reputation. It typically experiences very few malfunctions, even when using a variety of ammunition types. Proper maintenance, which is easy due to its simplified design, will enhance its dependability.
The Bodyguard 2.0 has also demonstrated good reliability for the most part. Some shooters have reported occasional issues, such as failure to feed or failure to eject, but these are relatively rare. Using high-quality ammunition and maintaining the pistol regularly generally minimizes the likelihood of malfunctions.
Ease of Maintenance and Disassembly
The design of both pistols allows for relatively easy disassembly and maintenance. The Glock 42, in typical Glock fashion, is simple to take apart and clean, even without any specialized tools. The Bodyguard 2.0 also has a streamlined design and, in general, its disassembly and maintenance are fairly straightforward.
Concealed Carry Considerations
Concealed carry presents its own set of considerations. What matters the most when choosing a pocket pistol is often the suitability for daily carry, and several factors impact this decision.
Concealability
Concealability is, perhaps, the most critical factor. The Glock 42, while relatively small for a Glock, is larger than many pocket pistols. It’s still very concealable, but may require a slightly larger pocket or a specialized holster. It can be comfortably carried in various positions, including inside-the-waistband (IWB), pocket carry, and ankle carry.
The Bodyguard 2.0, being even smaller and lighter, typically wins in terms of pure concealability. Its compact dimensions allow it to disappear more easily. It is ideally suited for pocket carry, making it a good choice when wearing casual clothing or when discretion is the main goal.
Comfort
Comfort is another key consideration. Both pistols, due to their compact sizes, are generally comfortable to carry for extended periods. The Glock 42, despite its slightly larger dimensions, can be comfortable when paired with a suitable holster.
The Bodyguard 2.0, owing to its smaller size and lighter weight, often feels more comfortable for all-day carry, especially when carried in a pocket or IWB.
Pros and Cons
Let’s summarize the positive and negative attributes of each pistol, offering a clear picture of their strengths and weaknesses.
Glock 42
The Glock 42 offers a range of notable advantages. The pistol is renowned for its reliability, featuring a proven design that is easy to maintain. Its simple design and familiar controls also make it user-friendly. Its light and relatively crisp trigger enhances accuracy, and the relatively larger size makes it easier to grip for most hands.
The disadvantages include the slightly larger size compared to some pocket pistols, which could affect its concealability.
Bodyguard 2.0
The Bodyguard 2.0 presents a different collection of advantages. Its most notable asset is its very compact size and weight, making it exceptionally concealable. The presence of an integrated laser sight is a significant advantage, especially in low-light situations.
The disadvantages are the trigger pull, which may not be as smooth or light as that of the Glock 42, which impacts shooting experience.
Pricing and Availability
Price and accessibility is also an important factor to consider.
The prices of both the Glock 42 and the Bodyguard 2.0 fluctuate based on market availability and any additional features. Generally speaking, both firearms are available at competitive prices, making them accessible to a wide range of consumers.
Both pistols are widely available in the firearms market. It is very easy to find them in gun stores and online retailers.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Glock 42 and the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0 represent excellent choices for those seeking a reliable and discreet pocket pistol. Each pistol offers a unique set of features and benefits that cater to various preferences and needs. The Glock 42 shines with its robust design, reliable performance, and familiar controls, while the Bodyguard 2.0 excels in its compact size and integrated features, such as the option of an integrated laser. Ultimately, the best choice depends on your individual needs. When making a decision, it is always essential to consider factors such as your preferred carry method, comfort level, shooting experience, and your general requirements for a defensive firearm. If possible, we strongly recommend you handle and shoot both pistols to find what will best fit your personal needs and the particular role that you want the gun to fill.
