Bodyguard 2.0 Optic

UPDATE: 4-15-25

Crimson Trace laser guards for S&W Body Guard 2.0

I just received a reply from Crimson Trace...

"At this point in time we do not have anything for the 2.0.  We do hope to release laser guards for 2.0."
 
UPDATE: 4-15-25

Crimson Trace laser guards for S&W Body Guard 2.0

I just received a reply from Crimson Trace...

"At this point in time we do not have anything for the 2.0.  We do hope to release laser guards for 2.0."

Well I guess we'll have to wait for Armalaser. I am a fan of Crimson Trace but I have to say from my experience I like the Armalaser products better. No button to push!
 
Again, your gun, your choices, and no desire to whizz on anyone's corn flakes.
But the BG2.0 is a modern derringer, meant for card table range. With better sights, and a good shot, it is capable at far greater distances. But let's keep some perspective; if we're going to add an electronic sight to a REALLY tiny gun, why not go a little bigger? A P365 offers a service caliber, and an assortment of dots and lasers.
Anyone who can keep 4-5" groups, at combat distances, is doing just fine with the irons. Get them zeroed, and you'll be better served.
A buddy at our Club relentlessly tries to make EVERYTHING a target gun, shooting it dueler style. We have to remember, horses for courses. I don't carry a 41 or a 52 for defense, and don't shoot bullseye with a BG2.0
Moon
 
One nice thing about firearms, they are like toilet paper…. Lots of good choices... you can find one that feels good and gets the job done.

I have two (2) P365s. The XL was a little too heavy. My Micro is slightly smaller and lighter.

I tried a Romeo red dot on the Micro. It didn’t work for me. It hung up on my draws too often and after much practice, I could NOT find that little flipp’n red dot quick enough. I will not have red dot on my carry defense handgun.

I put the red dot on the XL and use it for practice at the range.

I added the Lima green laser to the Micro and found it to be extremely quick at targeting and extremely accurate for sighting. I have 2 other green laser sights on two other firearms and find them to be excellent for low light defense distances.

The green lasers are really nice for practicing at the range for improving my grip and trigger control.

The green dot in daylight is not visible, so I practice with the iron sights.. At the indoor range at 25 yards, the green dot is just barely visible on a splatter target.

At “card table range”, I won’t be looking for sights, I’ll be pointing and shooting. :D
 
Again, your gun, your choices, and no desire to whizz on anyone's corn flakes.
But the BG2.0 is a modern derringer, meant for card table range. With better sights, and a good shot, it is capable at far greater distances. But let's keep some perspective; if we're going to add an electronic sight to a REALLY tiny gun, why not go a little bigger? A P365 offers a service caliber, and an assortment of dots and lasers.
Anyone who can keep 4-5" groups, at combat distances, is doing just fine with the irons. Get them zeroed, and you'll be better served.
A buddy at our Club relentlessly tries to make EVERYTHING a target gun, shooting it dueler style. We have to remember, horses for courses. I don't carry a 41 or a 52 for defense, and don't shoot bullseye with a BG2.0
Moon
Sorry for the late reply, I hadn't checked this post since a few days after I originally posted.

I hear you and agree really, and that is why the BG isn't my carry 95% of the time which actually is a P365XL. I only bought the BG 2.0 for very occasional use when my outfit wouldn't work well with my Sig. i.e. gym shorts, etc.

Once I had the BG 2.0 I found through my using it that without craning my head awkwardly up to peer through the bottom of my bifocals, I was dangerously slow and not accurate. Sure, I could hit center mass at 5 yards just point shooting derringer style, but I was spending a lot of time just trying to get a sight picture that made sense at 10 yards. I really wasn't looking for a derringer range only option for myself really.

That said, since I last posted I have found that pocket draw practice after the optic addition to be really smooth. Due to its shape, the only hang-ups I seem to get is insertion back into my pocket because of the squared off 90 degree face. The angled slope on the rear when drawing after hundreds of training draws has shown it to not be an issue, as in not a single hang. Through that, at least for me, it has reinforced that the lack of sight picture and acquisition time gives me far more hesitation and lack of confidence than the perceived potential catching issue. That's not to say everyone should do it like I did. It's very personal. Like you said, your gun, your choices. 100%
 
Once I had the BG 2.0 I found through my using it that without craning my head awkwardly up to peer through the bottom of my bifocals.
I struggled with this for years until I found an optomatrist that solved this for me. With progressive lenses, he raised the start of the bifocal by 2mm, which was just enough for me to see the sights much better without interfering with my distance vision. It really works. I've since had cataract replaements so I don't need glasses anymore.
 
Sorry for the late reply, I hadn't checked this post since a few days after I originally posted.

I hear you and agree really, and that is why the BG isn't my carry 95% of the time which actually is a P365XL. I only bought the BG 2.0 for very occasional use when my outfit wouldn't work well with my Sig. i.e. gym shorts, etc.

Once I had the BG 2.0 I found through my using it that without craning my head awkwardly up to peer through the bottom of my bifocals, I was dangerously slow and not accurate. Sure, I could hit center mass at 5 yards just point shooting derringer style, but I was spending a lot of time just trying to get a sight picture that made sense at 10 yards. I really wasn't looking for a derringer range only option for myself really.

That said, since I last posted I have found that pocket draw practice after the optic addition to be really smooth. Due to its shape, the only hang-ups I seem to get is insertion back into my pocket because of the squared off 90 degree face. The angled slope on the rear when drawing after hundreds of training draws has shown it to not be an issue, as in not a single hang. Through that, at least for me, it has reinforced that the lack of sight picture and acquisition time gives me far more hesitation and lack of confidence than the perceived potential catching issue. That's not to say everyone should do it like I did. It's very personal. Like you said, your gun, your choices. 100%

What did you go with for an optic mounting? Photo?
 
What did you go with for an optic mounting? Photo?
You can see the pictures on the first post of this thread. I have the Galloway Precision RMSc mount with a Sig Romeo on it. I'm not in love with the mount and am thinking seriously about the Monsoon Tactical cut solution at some point.
 
You can see the pictures on the first post of this thread. I have the Galloway Precision RMSc mount with a Sig Romeo on it. I'm not in love with the mount and am thinking seriously about the Monsoon Tactical cut solution at some point.

HA! Completely missed those photos.

I agree not liking the height of that mount. I've used other dove tail mounts before with good success on my 380EZ and 9EZ pistols so I'm familiar with them. But that one from Galloway is just thick. I believe the two I used before were from outer impact.

I'm definitely considering the Monsoon Tactical cut, the Holosun 407/507's are pretty small, is there a smaller RMSc/Holosun K style optic?
 
HA! Completely missed those photos.

I agree not liking the height of that mount. I've used other dove tail mounts before with good success on my 380EZ and 9EZ pistols so I'm familiar with them. But that one from Galloway is just thick. I believe the two I used before were from outer impact.

I'm definitely considering the Monsoon Tactical cut, the Holosun 407/507's are pretty small, is there a smaller RMSc/Holosun K style optic?
I think the RMSc pattern optics out there are for the most part the smallest in general. Something tells me there may be something obscure that is smaller, but in general RMSc is the smallest common size.

First, my optic here is a Romeo Zero, wanted to clarify. Got it for under $100 on some sale on one of the websites out there. It is very much not my favorite optic. The button controls for power and brightness is moronic and I hate that the battery is under the optic.

I love my several 507's. The 507c is not small. The 507k is the RMSc small size, just to be clear. The 507k I love. I think the 507k's are about the smallest out there that are still durable and worth it. Have a 507k ACSS on my P365 and a regular 507k on my VP9. Been very happy with them. Particularly the side load battery drawer, but you need to put a little vibratite or blue thread locker on the threads as I've had a battery try pop out twice otherwise, but never since.

Totally agree with the thickness thing of the Galloway. Like the Kardashian of optic mounting on my slide and their little viewport underneath the mount to use the iron sights is 100% gimmicky unworkable.
 
Back
Top