What new Bodyguard 2.0 parts?

GnarlsR2 said:

If S&W’s “logic” for the wide slot on the rear sight of the BG2 was to enable the shooter to quickly find the front sight aligned with the rear sight, then narrowing the rear sight slot would make it more difficult to quickly locate the front sight. For me that “logic” completely fails.

If S&W engineers were aware of human physiology, a very bright front dot aligning with a rear sight with 2 white dots on it will work better.

Why are the sights on a self-defense handgun so difficult to engineer and make highly effective?

Click to expand...

Check out this completely new take on front sights:

https://saberdynesystems.com/ndex-sights/

SeniorShooter said:

Check out this completely new take on front sights:

https://saberdynesystems.com/ndex-sights/

Click to expand...

I looked at the shape and size of the NDEX: Small Height (No Red Dot).
The sights visually appear to be high enough, and sharp-edged enough to potentially interfere with a draw by catching on clothing.
I don't know if the sight edges would possibly touch the skin in an appendix carry?

The back edges on my BG2 sights are sharper to the touch than the back edges on my P365.
If I were designing iron sights on defense carry I would slightly round the edges.
BUT... what I know about firearm design wouldn't make a little pimple on Bruce Gray's butt.

I think that porting a .380 is more about marketing than anything else. I have the BG 2.0, and it has yet to get away from me from the massive muzzle blast.

65-2x2 said:

I think that porting a .380 is more about marketing than anything else. I have the BG 2.0, and it has yet to get away from me from the massive muzzle blast.

Click to expand...

Yep, that's very true. What I would rather see is a longer barrel for the BG2.0. You'd get more velocity and still be able to use the same slide, frame, and most holsters. A 4 inch barrel would not add much weight but would give a much faster bullet. And the extra weight up front would also dampen muzzle flip, for those who are concerned with that.

tarheel13 said:

Yep, that's very true. What I would rather see is a longer barrel for the BG2.0. You'd get more velocity and still be able to use the same slide, frame, and most holsters. A 4 inch barrel would not add much weight but would give a much faster bullet. And the extra weight up front would also dampen muzzle flip, for those who are concerned with that.

Click to expand...

But then it wouldn't be so tiny!

65-2x2 said:

But then it wouldn't be so tiny!

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've used exactly that argument myself. At least a longer barrel would add functionality with very little extra weight.

tarheel13 said:

Yeah, I've used exactly that argument myself. At least a longer barrel would add functionality with very little extra weight.

Click to expand...

Adding any weight or size would not add "functionality" as a highly concealable, comfortable, close encounter self-defense pocket carry.

GnarlsR2 said:

Adding any weight or size would not add "functionality" as a highly concealable, comfortable, close encounter self-defense pocket carry.

Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. Taking a gun that exists for the sake of concealability and adding stuff to it that makes it less concealable is self-defeating. It's like taking a small car known for its fuel efficiency and modding the engine until it's only slightly faster and now gets significantly worse mileage.

GnarlsR2 said:

Adding any weight or size would not add "functionality" as a highly concealable, comfortable, close encounter self-defense pocket carry.

Click to expand...

I was thinking about folks who would want the "new parts" for a BG2.0, i.e. a longer, heavier slide and a longer but comped barrel that adds no sight radius or bullet velocity. By comparison, a 4 inch barrel (a 50% increase in length over the BG2.0) would add less weight, less bulk, and would significantly increase bullet velocity. Given that the .380 round was originally designed for a 3.75 inch barrel, the BG2.0 is wasting a large fraction of the potential projectile momentum. And unlike the "new parts" which are pretty much useless in a close-range self defense pistol, that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful. It would increase penetration with an FMJ cartridge and would most likely enable use of JHP rounds which are so unreliable in the current BG2.0.

Like you, I admire the overall design of the BG2.0. It has a full size grip on a tiny frame and slide. But a longer barrel would not diminish those virtues. It's the only change to the current design that I think might be worthwhile. But I suspect it is not taken seriously for cosmetic reasons. There is a strong presumption that (with the exception of threaded barrels) the barrel should end when the slide does. I don't see a practical reason for this.

All else being equal, I don't see how adding a little to the length of the barrel and slide will make a significant difference in the concealibility of the BG2.0. I have both a BG2.0 and a 2.0 Carry Comp. I originally purchased a pocket holster for the 2.0, and was able to easily modify it to hold the Carry Comp version using a heat gun. Needless to say, it's not taking up any more real estate in my pocket. Another half inch still wouldn't make any difference, either in the pocket, or IWB, which would be my next choice (if I couldn't pocket carry), in my opinion. YMMV


Frank

tarheel13 said:

I was thinking about folks who would want the "new parts" for a BG2.0, i.e. a longer, heavier slide and a longer but comped barrel that adds no sight radius or bullet velocity. By comparison, a 4 inch barrel (a 50% increase in length over the BG2.0) would add less weight, less bulk, and would significantly increase bullet velocity. Given that the .380 round was originally designed for a 3.75 inch barrel, the BG2.0 is wasting a large fraction of the potential projectile momentum. And unlike the "new parts" which are pretty much useless in a close-range self defense pistol, that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful. It would increase penetration with an FMJ cartridge and would most likely enable use of JHP rounds which are so unreliable in the current BG2.0.

Like you, I admire the overall design of the BG2.0. It has a full size grip on a tiny frame and slide. But a longer barrel would not diminish those virtues. It's the only change to the current design that I think might be worthwhile. But I suspect it is not taken seriously for cosmetic reasons. There is a strong presumption that (with the exception of threaded barrels) the barrel should end when the slide does. I don't see a practical reason for this.

Click to expand...

"that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful"

Geezz... let's calculate that usefulness....

Adding from 2.75" barrel to a 4" barrel will add approximately 35 feet per second in velocity.
To a target 21 feet away, a bullet traveling 900 fps will hit the target in 0.0233 seconds or 23.33 milliseconds.
A bullet out of the 4" barrel at 935 fps will hit the target in 0.0225 seconds or 22.66 milliseconds.

So the bullet from the 4" inch barrel is faster by 0.0008 seconds.

Comparisons to the Real World....

To understand just how fast 0.0008 seconds is, consider these fast-moving real-world events:

• Camera Shutter: A standard high-speed sports camera shutter operates at 1/1250 of a second, which is exactly 0.0008 seconds.
• Insect Wings: A mosquito beats its wings once every 0.0016 seconds, meaning 0.0008 seconds is long enough for just a single half-stroke (up or down).
• Speed of Sound: In 0.0008 seconds, sound travels roughly 10.7 inches (27 cm) through the air.
• Speed of Light: Light travels approximately 149 miles (240 km) in this short window.
• Human Blink: A typical human eye blink takes about 0.1 to 0.4 seconds. That means 0.0008 seconds is roughly 500 times faster than a single blink.

With a 4" barreled BG2, as I'm pulling it out of my pocket the darn thing takes 0.08 seconds longer to clear my pocket, that attacking perpetrator that I have to fire on will get hit with my bullet 0.0585 seconds later than my 900 fps 2.75" barreled BG2.

GnarlsR2 said:

"that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful"

Geezz... let's calculate that usefulness....

Adding from 2.75" barrel to a 4" barrel will add approximately 35 feet per second in velocity.
To a target 21 feet away, a bullet traveling 900 fps will hit the target in 0.0233 seconds or 23.33 milliseconds.
A bullet out of the 4" barrel at 935 fps will hit the target in 0.0225 seconds or 22.66 milliseconds.

So the bullet from the 4" inch barrel is faster by 0.0008 seconds.

Comparisons to the Real World....

To understand just how fast 0.0008 seconds is, consider these fast-moving real-world events:

• Camera Shutter: A standard high-speed sports camera shutter operates at 1/1250 of a second, which is exactly 0.0008 seconds.
• Insect Wings: A mosquito beats its wings once every 0.0016 seconds, meaning 0.0008 seconds is long enough for just a single half-stroke (up or down).
• Speed of Sound: In 0.0008 seconds, sound travels roughly 10.7 inches (27 cm) through the air.
• Speed of Light: Light travels approximately 149 miles (240 km) in this short window.
• Human Blink: A typical human eye blink takes about 0.1 to 0.4 seconds. That means 0.0008 seconds is roughly 500 times faster than a single blink.

With a 4" barreled BG2, as I'm pulling it out of my pocket the darn thing takes 0.08 seconds longer to clear my pocket, that attacking perpetrator that I have to fire on will get hit with my bullet 0.0585 seconds later than my 900 fps 2.75" barreled BG2.

Click to expand...

My wife & I are snowbirds, so I will be getting a 2nd BG2 soon, for my other home, and I've pretty much decided on the standard model. I'll be ordering 2 of the Crimson Trace lasers when they are released, and 2 AIWB laser compatible holsters. And I HOPE! that'll remain my CCW for at least a few years to come, before they reinvent the wheel again!

GnarlsR2 said:

"that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful"

Geezz... let's calculate that usefulness....


Adding from 2.75" barrel to a 4" barrel will add approximately 35 feet per second in velocity.
...
With a 4" barreled BG2, as I'm pulling it out of my pocket the darn thing takes 0.08 seconds longer to clear my pocket, that attacking perpetrator that I have to fire on will get hit with my bullet 0.0585 seconds later than my 900 fps 2.75" barreled BG2.

Click to expand...

Ha! I knew I would get an entertaining answer from you Gnarls. Clearly you have a scientific background and a really "gnarly" sense of humor. I will, for the moment, ignore the fact that you achieved 3 significant figures in a conclusion based on 1 significant figure of starting "data". But I'm most interested in how you arrived at the 35 fps increase based on a 50% increase in barrel length.

And of course the point about velocity was not about how soon the bullet would hit the perp, but about what that bullet would accomplish after it reached its target. But you already knew that.

tarheel13 said:

And of course the point about velocity was not about how soon the bullet would hit the pert, but about what that bullet would accomplish after it reached its target. But you already knew that.

Click to expand...

Agreed, I would want to know how the increased velocity would affect both penetration, and expansion, both of which are what causes the .380 cartridge to not be looked at as a serious self-defense caliber by many.


Frank

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/380auto.html
The .380 round generally has a fast burning powder to make it funtion in a relatively short barrel. But in this case, short is 3.75 inches. When you drop as low as 2.75 then there is some real gain to be had from adding an inch (and a quarter).

tarheel13 said:

Ha! I knew I would get an entertaining answer from you Gnarls. Clearly you have a scientific background and a really "gnarly" sense of humor. I will, for the moment, ignore the fact that you achieved 3 significant figures in a conclusion based on 1 significant figure of starting "data". But I'm most interested in how you arrived at the 35 fps increase based on a 50% increase in barrel length.

And of course the point about velocity was not about how soon the bullet would hit the pert, but about what that bullet would accomplish after it reached its target. But you already knew that.

Click to expand...

Hello tarheel13,

I was hoping you’d appreciate my sense of humor.

One of my favorite words is precursor. In Science, Chemistry, and Biology “it refers to a basic substance, compound, or cellular component from which a more complex or mature substance is formed. For instance, cholesterol is a precursor to testosterone, and stem cells are precursors to specialized cells.”

I look at velocity as the speed and time it takes to reach my target, and the precursor to any damage to my target.

Since statistically a civilian self-defense event only lasts a few seconds. If the target appears to be an impending lethal threat time is most critical in my defense.

If the bullet does not reach the target in time to stop the threat, damage caused by an additional 35 or 100 feet per second does not matter.

Velocity as speed is the precursor to bullet penetration and bodily damage.

As shown in the math, 0.0008 seconds is 16 times faster than the human eye-brain can detect.

Just for gits & shiggles let’s use the difference in velocity between a 2.75” BG2 barrel and 4.0” BG2 barrel as 1,000 fps.

The 2.75” barrel, 900 fps, will hit a target 21 feet away in 0.0225 seconds or 22.66 milliseconds.

The 4.0” barrel’s increased velocity to 1,000 fps will hit the target in 0.0023 or 2.3 milliseconds. That is 150 times faster than a single blink of a human eye.

However, the difference of an increased velocity to 1,000 fps increases kinetic energy by 23.46%. Will that increase cause more tissue damage? In ballistic measurements, that ~ 23% increase rarely causes significantly more tissue damage.

So… the difference may be insignificant, but certainly desirable.

Yes… "that extra muzzle velocity would potentially be very useful"

By the way, the license plate on my 1986 Toyota Xtracab is “2NARLY”.

No matter what Smith & Wesson (or any other maker for that matter) comes up with folks will be asking..

"Can you make it with a longer slide and barrel?"
"Can you make it even shorter?"
"Can you make an all metal version?"
"Can you put a Pic rail on it?"
"Can you take the Pic rail off?
"Can you make it in .30 Super Carry?"
"Can you make it in .25 ACP and give it a 20-round capacity?"
"Can you make it in pink?
"Can you make it in bright blue?"

Eventually the manufacturer tries to please everybody and makes all these variations, loses their ass money-wise and then we wonder why they went bankrupt.