The Beretta 21A (Bobcat) Inox — my new BUG.

Don't trust the factory mags or the MecGar branded on that one. You can't load the mags to capacity and the top round likes to hit the front of the magazine instead of chambering. I've had over 30 years of experience with that gun.

According to the manual, although the magazine can hold a certain number of rounds, (IIRC, 8) it is only designed to hold one less (IIRC, 7) and therefore if you load the magazine until it cannot fit anymore rounds, it will malfunction because the top round isn't in the proper orientation to feed.

Anyone question the practical value or utility of a backup gun for civilian carry? It would seem a practice informally relegated to law enforcement only. I'm inquiring here and not doing so disparagingly.

It's a "If you know, you know" situation.

I view a BUG the same way as I view a spare magazine, you don't carry one because you're likely going to need it, but rather in case you need it.

Much like Prepping, it's a practice that the lay person who has never been in a situation in which they were inadequately prepared for with potentially dire consequences is apt to understand and will inevitably question, while everyone else does not because they already know.
 
According to the manual, although the magazine can hold a certain number of rounds, (IIRC, 8) it is only designed to hold one less (IIRC, 7) and therefore if you load the magazine until it cannot fit anymore rounds, it will malfunction because the top round isn't in the proper orientation to feed.



It's a "If you know, you know" situation.

I view a BUG the same way as I view a spare magazine, you don't carry one because you're likely going to need it, but rather in case you need it.

Much like Prepping, it's a practice that the lay person who has never been in a situation in which they were inadequately prepared for with potentially dire consequences is apt to understand and will inevitably question, while everyone else does not because they already know.
According to the manual, although the magazine can hold a certain number of rounds, (IIRC, 8) it is only designed to hold one less (IIRC, 7) and therefore if you load the magazine until it cannot fit anymore rounds, it will malfunction because the top round isn't in the proper orientation to feed.



It's a "If you know, you know" situation.

I view a BUG the same way as I view a spare magazine, you don't carry one because you're likely going to need it, but rather in case you need it.

Much like Prepping, it's a practice that the lay person who has never been in a situation in which they were inadequately prepared for with potentially dire consequences is apt to understand and will inevitably question, while everyone else does not because they already know.
I usually have a backup gun to go along with my essential guns. I have two Berettas, 2 Glockish guns, and 3 1911's. All of my other handguns are just gravy or niche purpose guns. But I don't carry a backup on me.

I have backups in case of a mechanical problem, so if one does occur I'm not left gunless. You know, like if one has to go in for service at the gunsmith. I also try to keep certain parts on hand, like springs and magazines/ mag parts.
 
According to the manual, although the magazine can hold a certain number of rounds, (IIRC, 8) it is only designed to hold one less (IIRC, 7) and therefore if you load the magazine until it cannot fit anymore rounds, it will malfunction because the top round isn't in the proper orientation to feed.



It's a "If you know, you know" situation.

I view a BUG the same way as I view a spare magazine, you don't carry one because you're likely going to need it, but rather in case you need it.

Much like Prepping, it's a practice that the lay person who has never been in a situation in which they were inadequately prepared for with potentially dire consequences is apt to understand and will inevitably question, while everyone else does not because they already know.
This applies to ammo as well. You may not need it now, but better to have it and not need it. And, it makes good currency during shortages.
 
Read that the 21a is discontinued and the new model is the 20X.
The 21a has a 7 round mag.

Somehow I doubt that the 20X will have the same amount of staying power as the 21A. Beretta has a bad habit of attempting to upgrade/replace an iconic pistol with a "new and improved" model which utterly fails to sell as well as the classic model. (See the Beretta 90-TWO, 92A1, and M9A3 for details.)

Also, the Beretta 20X follows the bizarre trend of detrimentally fitting suppressor height sights onto a concealed carry pistol. As much as folks often complained about the low profile sights on the 21A, folks seem to misunderstand that they were made that way intentionally so that they wouldn't snag when drawn from a pocket.
 
I serious question the whole suppressor use thing on ANY concealed carry pistol (as well as most of the other "Add ons" so many of the kewl kids use. Frankly, the purpose of a concealed carry gun is, I'm, concealment. Why anyone would chose to make it bigger and harder to conceal eludes me. If I'm wanted to conceal "more" I'll take a bigger gun, easier to shoot accurately, etc. YMMV.
 
I serious question the whole suppressor use thing on ANY concealed carry pistol (as well as most of the other "Add ons" so many of the kewl kids use. Frankly, the purpose of a concealed carry gun is, I'm, concealment. Why anyone would chose to make it bigger and harder to conceal eludes me. If I'm wanted to conceal "more" I'll take a bigger gun, easier to shoot accurately, etc. YMMV.
Here you are in the realm of illusionary Internet gunfighting and it occurs regularly.
 
I see these folks talk about optics, lights, suppressors on CC pistols and just roll my eyes. Let's see, you buy a small pistol and the add a lot of bulk and weight and size. Perfectly logical🙄
About the same as a short barreled shotgun with or without a buttstock but having lights, optical sights, and extra ammo hanging all over it and maybe a bayonet...
 
About the same as a short barreled shotgun with or without a buttstock but having lights, optical sights, and extra ammo hanging all over it and maybe a bayonet...
You got it. It seems in today's world unless you have a lot of tactkewl stuff strapped on a firearm it just doesn't work for "defense". Kinda like reducing the size of a cc pistol as much as possible and then making it bigger with more rails to strap still more junk on. You wind up with a small gun that's heavier and bulkier that a full size service gun. Different strokes I guess but I fail to see the logic. But hey, I'm not kewl😏. I just want a handgun that is accurate for me and that I can and will carry every waking hour.
 
You got it. It seems in today's world unless you have a lot of tactkewl stuff strapped on a firearm it just doesn't work for "defense". Kinda like reducing the size of a cc pistol as much as possible and then making it bigger with more rails to strap still more junk on. You wind up with a small gun that's heavier and bulkier that a full size service gun. Different strokes I guess but I fail to see the logic. But hey, I'm not kewl😏. I just want a handgun that is accurate for me and that I can and will carry every waking hour.
They're well-equipped for the regular Internet dream gunfights where they are attacked by multiple armed opponents, all wearing bullet proof vests. Need lots of magazines, ammo of different varieties, and batteries to operate the optical sights. You fail to see the logic because there is none.
 
I serious question the whole suppressor use thing on ANY concealed carry pistol (as well as most of the other "Add ons" so many of the kewl kids use. Frankly, the purpose of a concealed carry gun is, I'm, concealment. Why anyone would chose to make it bigger and harder to conceal eludes me. If I'm wanted to conceal "more" I'll take a bigger gun, easier to shoot accurately, etc. YMMV.

Don't ask me, frankly I think Suppressors in general are a stupid waste of time. I briefly looked into getting a Suppressor for my AR-15, but was quickly turned off by the fact that they're ridiculously expensive for what they are, required an additional expense and waiting period, all for a device that cannot even reduce the noise down to hearing safe levels. Oh, and it will typically negatively impact reliability so you need to play with buffer weights/springs until it runs reliably, so what's the point?

As for weighing down a compact carry pistol with all sorts of electronic gadgets and gizmos, that's also stupid to me. I can see having some of that stuff on a Home Defense Rifle like an AR-15, but on a CCW? Uh, no... That's completely detrimental, but hey, if you want to LARP as a Suburban Commando, then have fun, just leave me out of it.
 
I don't have a problem with lights on a CCW gun for target identification. I wish that Lasermax still made the triggerguard light for J frame revolvers. I have one, but it doesn't work anymore.

I don't see the point of red dot sights or suppressors for a CCW gun, but I don't have anything against anyone who likes them. At least they stimulate the economy by generating sales tax revenue, and they also stimulate technological development.
 
My only issues with lights are (1) you wind up flagging anyone you shine the light at-maybe bad guys, maybe not. First rule of gun safety is never to point a weapon at anything you're not willing to destroy, and (2) your light provides a dandy aiming point for the armed guy you are facing. If your pistol is in a firing position and he aims at the light, you are hit. I was taught years ago to hold a light out to the side and slightly forward so it illuminates the target and not you. YMMV
 
Here you are in the realm of illusionary Internet gunfighting and it occurs regularly.
I seriously doubt that any of these Internet Gunfighters have ever heard a shot fired in anger. When and if they do, they will probably make water all over their "CCW with all the dodads".
 
It spits lead, shoots way left with just about any ammo, has suffered harsh ejection, though that seems to have been fixed, and most recently wanted to lock up after 25-30 rounds. I like the idea and the design. I hate the execution. I think mine is a dud as I hear of others who have had no problems at all. S&W has it for the third time. S&W has had it back at the shop more than I've had it at home. Hoping this time it comes back fixed, a reimbursement, or a new gun.
 
It spits lead, shoots way left with just about any ammo, has suffered harsh ejection, though that seems to have been fixed, and most recently wanted to lock up after 25-30 rounds. I like the idea and the design. I hate the execution. I think mine is a dud as I hear of others who have had no problems at all. S&W has it for the third time. S&W has had it back at the shop more than I've had it at home. Hoping this time it comes back fixed, a reimbursement, or a new gun.
Sorry you're going through that. I've read of other people having problems with that gun due to the aluminum cylinder expanding from the heat, and causing timing and ejection issues. Maybe you could mail a letter to the CEO of Smith and Wesson and ask for a reimbursement or a new gun.
 
I layer out three options: fix, replace, or reimburse, in my last communication with customer service when it went back the last time. Waiting to hear what they decide. I made it clear I have a long history with A&W revolvers, including the the Js and .22 revolvers. I liked the centennial design over other manufacturers' products. We'll see how they proceed. I may have to fire off a letter next.

The first time I took the brand new gun out to the range, from the first rounds fired, a really lit of force was required to eject empties. Fired different brands of ammo and they all were varying degrees of hard. Let it cool down, brushed out the charge holes with a nylon brush and still had the problem. Add insult to injury, it spit lead badly (glad I wore safety glasses) and shot six inches left of POA at 21 feet with everything. S&W replaced the cylinder and recut the forcing cone. Second time, it still spit a bit of lead and shot six inches left, but ejection was fine. Went back, barrel reportedly adjusted and forcing cone recut. Still shot left and cylinder got hard to close or open even though barrel gap didn't seem to be an impediment. So, it's back again….

I want this gun to work as they're not exactly cheap. And furthermore, I'd like it to work because I also want a 351C, but not if this one won't.
 
Back
Top