Chiappa Rhino?

[CavalierLeif]

I have a few S&W wheel guns and I enjoy the traditional aspect of them. They're what I'm used to shooting. However, sometimes I wonder about advancements in revolver technology and the seemingly limited variation outside of the same classic models from S&W and Colt and their clones.

The Chiappa Rhino has a - *ahem* - "unique" look that sets it apart from most other revolvers. The low bore axis is supposed to help with stability.

However, I don't see many people shooting them. Large public ranges are mostly dominated by Glock shooters, but I've seen enough revolvers and they're always of more traditional style. I've seen more Korths being shot than Chiappa Rhinos.

For those of you that have one or have shot one - what's the take? Is it niche but effective or more of a novelty gun?

 

[Tallball]

I shot a cylinder through one once. It was fine, neither great nor terrible.

I'd get one for the novelty if they weren't expensive.

 

[Jonny2guns]

My son has one and I shot it a couple of times. I don't ever plan to buy one, just didn't impress me.

 

[somethingbenign]

I rented one at a range and put a couple boxes of ammo through it with a buddy. I loved the recoil impulse and a rhino is on my short list of guns to buy now. It just seems every time I have the cash ready the guns are out of stock locally.

 

[Styx]

Gimmick revolver that will take a finger if there's a kaboom

 

[RH45]

I have one in 40 caliber that was reamed for 10mm. MUCH less muzzle jump than a “normal” revolver. I’ve HEARD of people with large hands getting stung by the cylinder gap, because the barrel is at the bottom, but never heard of anyone losing a thumb like the S&W 460, and 500.

 

[Pat Riot]

Gimmick revolver that will take a finger if there's a kaboom

Your post prompted me to go looking for information on kabooms and injuries with Chiappa Rhinos because I am very interested in buying one.
I did a search on DuckDuckGo (I do not use Google) and I didn’t find much. I also tried to find out how many Chiappa Rhinos have been made since their introduction in 2010. I couldn’t find anything on that.

Search words used:
Kaboom
Blew up
Exploded
Mishap
Injury
Incident
High pressure
Guy blew it up (1 that referenced the Reddit link)
Lost finger (1 that referenced the Kaboom link)

Links I found below and search word used (underline):

Kaboom
1 with few details

Chiappa Rhino Kaboom -

The Chiappa Rhino may not be everyone’s cup of tea but it sure is unique. It’s odd look comes from the fact that it fires from the bottom chamber to help reduce felt recoil. Earlier this year fellow TFB writer James Reeves reviewed the Chiappa Rhino 200D chambered in .357 magnum and .38 special...

www.thefirearmblog.com

Exploded
1 with no details- could the same one as above

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

1 with same photo above with no details.

Chiappa Rhino vs hot handloads? Exploded view - literally

www.northwestfirearms.com

I tried to find numbers on how many Chiappa Rhinos have been manufactured or imported into the USA.

1 documented injury doesn’t make the Rhino dangerous, in my opinion.

 

[unspellable]

The Rhino has a concealed hammer. The device in the position of the hammer on a conventional revolver is a cocking lever. Due to the internal leverage involved it's pretty stiff to cock for single action shooting.

 

[5-SHOTS]

The problem lies with those who shoot a revolver of any type with their thumbs forward believing they are shooting a semi-automatic pistol. It is not a revolver problem.

 

[Styx]

Your post prompted me to go looking for information on kabooms and injuries with Chiappa Rhinos because I am very interested in buying one.
I did a search on DuckDuckGo (I do not use Google) and I didn’t find much. I also tried to find out how many Chiappa Rhinos have been made since their introduction in 2010. I couldn’t find anything on that.

Search words used:
Kaboom
Blew up
Exploded
Mishap
Injury
Incident
High pressure
Guy blew it up (1 that referenced the Reddit link)
Lost finger (1 that referenced the Kaboom link)

Links I found below and search word used (underline):

Kaboom
1 with few details

Chiappa Rhino Kaboom -

The Chiappa Rhino may not be everyone’s cup of tea but it sure is unique. It’s odd look comes from the fact that it fires from the bottom chamber to help reduce felt recoil. Earlier this year fellow TFB writer James Reeves reviewed the Chiappa Rhino 200D chambered in .357 magnum and .38 special...

www.thefirearmblog.com

Exploded
1 with no details- could the same one as above

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

1 with same photo above with no details.

Chiappa Rhino vs hot handloads? Exploded view - literally

www.northwestfirearms.com

I tried to find numbers on how many Chiappa Rhinos have been manufactured or imported into the USA.

1 documented injury doesn’t make the Rhino dangerous, in my opinion

I disagree. It's more dangerous than a traditional revolver by design no if, ands, or butts about it. You can't argue against physics and logic. Rhinos don't sell a lot of units and based on what I've seen and heard, most do no put as many rounds through a Rhino like they would other revolvers that sell over a million on an annual basis for many years. The number of instances maybe low because the number of users and rounds being put through these revolvers is low, but that doesn't take away what will happen if there is any problem with the ammo. The shooter is simply at a higher risk of injury with the Rhino vs. traditional revolvers. It has and can cost the shooter a finger, especially with the frame being a weaker aluminum alloy instead of steel.

With the Rhino, the round that is being fired on is in the bottom chamber closes to the trigger guard and the hand. When a Rhino kabooms, the explosion goes through an aluminum alloy frame directly into the hand and trigger finger. We see how a Rhino explodes in the picture you provided.

When a traditional revolver with the round that's being fired is in the top of the cylinder, the explosion is pushed AWAY from the hand. The hand and fingers of the shooter are protected/shielded by the cylinder and bottom of the frame.

You are free to spend your money however you wish if you truly believe the Rhino's design is perfectly fine and safe. For me and for the money, it's not worth the risk when I can buy a traditional revolver for less.

 

[TitanicTortilini]

I've put at least 500 rounds through my Rhino 30DS since I bought it, about half and half factory and hand loads, the vast majority 357 magnum. It's one of my favorites, great trigger, and it recoils straight back into the hand, keeping it on target is a breeze. Interestingly, both of the shops closest to me have told me that all the Rhino's are only available to high volume sellers from their distributor. So not only are not a lot of them imported, but plenty of stores couldn't stock them if they wanted to. It's an odd tactic, but the market for $1K+ revolvers isn't very large so I doubt a lot of people have noticed.

 

[Pat Riot]

View attachment 1191126
View attachment 1191138
View attachment 1191139


I disagree. It's more dangerous than a traditional revolver by design no if, ands, or butts about it. You can't argue against physics and logic. Rhinos don't sell a lot of units and based on what I've seen and heard, most do no put as many rounds through a Rhino like they would other revolvers that sell over a million on an annual basis for many years. The number of instances maybe low because the number of users and rounds being put through these revolvers is low, but that doesn't take away what will happen if there is any problem with the ammo. The shooter is simply at a higher risk of injury with the Rhino vs. traditional revolvers. It has and can cost the shooter a finger, especially with the frame being a weaker aluminum alloy instead of steel.

With the Rhino, the round that is being fired on is in the bottom chamber closes to the trigger guard and the hand. When a Rhino kabooms, the explosion goes through an aluminum alloy frame directly into the hand and trigger finger. We see how a Rhino explodes in the picture you provided.

When a traditional revolver with the round that's being fired is in the top of the cylinder, the explosion is pushed AWAY from the hand. The hand and fingers of the shooter are protected/shielded by the cylinder and bottom of the frame.

You are free to spend your money however you wish if you truly believe the Rhino's design is perfectly fine and safe. For me and for the money, it's not worth the risk when I can buy a traditional revolver for less.

View attachment 1191128
View attachment 1191129
View attachment 1191130
View attachment 1191131
View attachment 1191132

It appears that you don’t have any factual definitive information either regarding Rhino Kabooms.
The one instance I found had no real information. Who knows, the guy could have had a squib or he was shooting super hot reloaded ammo.
Using your logic regarding the construction of the Rhino it very well may be weaker and could be prone to failure if shot extensively with magnum ammo, but I don’t know that for sure.
Out of all the guys I know that are shooters I know only one guy that owns a Rhino. It definitely isn’t for everyone. The one guy that has one probably has a few hundred rounds through it. He likes shooting magnum ammo so I assume he shoots more .357 than .38, but I don’t know that for sure.

I sure would like to find info on how many have been imported. Knowing that would help determine if 1 or 2 Kabooms should be concerning or not.

 

[Styx]

It appears that you don’t have any factual definitive information either regarding Rhino Kabooms.
The one instance I found had no real information. Who knows, the guy could have had a squib or he was shooting super hot reloaded ammo.
Using your logic regarding the construction of the Rhino it very well may be weaker and could be prone to failure if shot extensively with magnum ammo, but I don’t know that for sure.
Out of all the guys I know that are shooters I know only one guy that owns a Rhino. It definitely isn’t for everyone. The one guy that has one probably has a few hundred rounds through it. He likes shooting magnum ammo so I assume he shoots more .357 than .38, but I don’t know that for sure.

I sure would like to find info on how many have been imported. Knowing that would help determine if 1 or 2 Kabooms should be concerning or not.

You can make excuses and rationales to make yourself feel better. If you want to still buy one, so be it. The fact is that the design, the materials used, and where the fired round lies, the Rhino puts the shooter at a much higher risk of injury versus a traditional revolver. Just because you know a couple of people who haven't had a Kaboom with their examples doesn't change the fact that if they did, they'd likely receive more serious injury.

The fact is reloads, remanufactured, and factory ammo has caused catastrophic failures in the past. If it happens with a Rhino, you very well could lose a finger as it has already happened. If it happens with a Ruger, Smith, or Colt, for example, the risk is less. The Rhino is not a very "fail-safe" design.

 

[Pat Riot]

You can make excuses and rationales to make yourself feel better. If you want to still buy one, so be it. The fact is that the design, the materials used, and where the fired round lies, the Rhino puts the shooter at a much higher risk of injury versus a traditional revolver. Just because you know a couple of people who haven't had a Kaboom with their examples doesn't change the fact that if they did, they'd likely receive more serious injury.

The fact is reloads, remanufactured, and factory ammo has caused catastrophic failures in the past. If it happens with a Rhino, you very well could lose a finger as it has already happened. If it happens with a Ruger, Smith, or Colt, for example, the risk is less. The Rhino is not a very "fail-safe" design.

It seems that you just want to argue.
No one said it was a fail safe gun. I know I didn’t.
No gun is “fail safe”. Anyone that thinks there is such a thing is nuts.
Sure, there’s a chance of burning or losing a finger if you don’t hold it right.
You could lose an eye if your Colt or S&W blows up.
Either way, it’s a bad thing.

 

[Styx]

It seems that you just want to argue.
No one said it was a fail safe gun. I know I didn’t.
No gun is “fail safe”. Anyone that thinks there is such a thing is nuts.
Sure, there’s a chance of burning or losing a finger if you don’t hold it right.
You could lose an eye if your Colt or S&W blows up.
Either way, it’s a bad thing.

Seems you're just in denial. There's a much higher chance of losing a finger if the revolver Kabooms. It's simple physics, and you can see the difference in how the revolvers fail in the pictures each of us posted. The very fact the chamber and cylinder is at the bottom of the revolver closes to the shooters hand, and the frame is made out of aluminum is prood enough. You just want to talk around this fact because you're fond of the revolver. The way the Rhino will fail when there is a Kaboom is more problematic than how a traditional revolver will fail. Period.

Yes, there is a risk of injury if any firearm has an explosion, but I would rather have an S&W or Ruger in my hand if a kaboom were to happen vs. a Chiappa Rhino. It's a legitimate risk that a buyer should know or at least take into account before deciding to purchase a Rhino.

FYI: "fail-safe" is a manufacturing/programming term. It refers to engineering a design that allows the firearm in this case to fail in the most safe way possible. An example of this is a car that is designed with the engine to drop under the car instead of doing into the drive/passenger during an accident. For a firearm example, the Kel Tec RDB and other bullpups. The shooters face is near the chamber by design, so most bullpups designs have steel plates that will direct any kabooms away from the shooter's face in case of failure.

 

[westernrover]

The issue here isn't that Rhinos blow up with any alarming frequency. It's that if they were to blow up, they cannot do so safely. Period.
A traditional revolver is absolutely designed to be safe when it fails. That doesn't mean safety is guaranteed, but when a predictable type of failure occurs like a ruptured chamber, the traditional revolver is designed to prevent or limit injury to the shooter. The Chiappa design appears to neglect this consideration entirely.

This is what John Henry Fitzgerald, of Colt's wrote in a Q&A published in 1930:

Q. If by an excessive load a cylinder and frame should be blown up would the shooter be injured?
A. No; not one chance in ten thousand of his being injured.

Why do you think he could answer that way?

 

[Pat Riot]

It's a legitimate risk that a buyer should know or at least take into account before deciding to purchase a Rhino.

You have definitely made your point. Thank you.

 

[westernrover]

I have had an aluminum/scandium alloy-framed revolver with a Titanium cylinder explode in my hands. The chamber with the cartridge being fired was at the top, facing away from my hands. The chamber ruptured upward, popped the top-strap up and the cylinder and crane came out at relatively low velocity. I suffered only a minor injury when the ratchet scraped my knuckle. What the cause was is uncertain. Whatever the cause or wherever the fault lay, I'm grateful it was thoughtfully designed to prevent injury. I cannot conclusively assign blame to the gun for the failure because I can't be 100% certain it wasn't the ammo, but that flimsy piece of junk 340PD had already been back to S&W 3 times for defects. After that, I swore off aluminum revolvers. I'm not telling you that aluminum revolvers "aren't safe" or that they blow up. That just isn't factual. On the other hand, I can tell you that aluminum revolvers are not durable. That is a fact. They wear out, come-apart, bend, break, and fail sooner than steel revolvers. Titanium also is a poor choice of material for a cylinder -- notice that Ruger passed on it for their Super GP100. There are reasons for this. People will say the S&W PD revolvers are to be "carried often, shot little." Yeah, whatever. I don't have a place for delicate garbage. I shot the hell out of mine with full magnums, and lots of them. I cracked Hogue wood stocks on it because the recoil was so sharp. That gun simply did not hold up. Personally, I would rule out the Rhino just because it's aluminum, irrespective of anything else. I don't want an aluminum S&W, Ruger, or Colt either.

 

[halfmoonclip]

I've a couple Rhinos, like to shoot them for the recoil impulse, their smooth double action, and their generally good ergos in the hand. The 'hammer' does work at a mechanical disadvantage for single action fire, but the single action break is quite good. I also shoot/carry a 340SC; it's seen its share of magnums, but .38s are more common.
Some things are sufficiently unlikely as to be pretty far down my worry list.
As always, YMMV.
Moon

 

[Pat Riot]

@CavalierLeif what model of Chiappa Rhino are you interested in?

I have been debating on getting one in 9mm. My LGS has a few to choose from in .357. Their inventory had a really good selection a few months ago, but they have sold quite a few. There is one in particular that hasn’t moved and the price has been dropped to $979. Not a fantastic bargain but definitely not at $1400 MSRP.
If it was a 4” I would probably buy it, but it’s a 6”. I am not sure if I meet another 6” barreled revolver.
Anyway, it’s this one:

Product Details

www.chiappafirearms.com

They also have a black 2” model in .38/.357 that I like, but I have my eyes on 2 other snub nosed revolvers.

 

[Tallball]

I have had an aluminum/scandium alloy-framed revolver with a Titanium cylinder explode in my hands. The chamber with the cartridge being fired was at the top, facing away from my hands. The chamber ruptured upward, popped the top-strap up and the cylinder and crane came out at relatively low velocity. I suffered only a minor injury when the ratchet scraped my knuckle. What the cause was is uncertain. Whatever the cause or wherever the fault lay, I'm grateful it was thoughtfully designed to prevent injury. I cannot conclusively assign blame to the gun for the failure because I can't be 100% certain it wasn't the ammo, but that flimsy piece of junk 340PD had already been back to S&W 3 times for defects. After that, I swore off aluminum revolvers. I'm not telling you that aluminum revolvers "aren't safe" or that they blow up. That just isn't factual. On the other hand, I can tell you that aluminum revolvers are not durable. That is a fact. They wear out, come-apart, bend, break, and fail sooner than steel revolvers. Titanium also is a poor choice of material for a cylinder -- notice that Ruger passed on it for their Super GP100. There are reasons for this. People will say the S&W PD revolvers are to be "carried often, shot little." Yeah, whatever. I don't have a place for delicate garbage. I shot the hell out of mine with full magnums, and lots of them. I cracked Hogue wood stocks on it because the recoil was so sharp. That gun simply did not hold up. Personally, I would rule out the Rhino just because it's aluminum, irrespective of anything else. I don't want an aluminum S&W, Ruger, or Colt either.

I carry a 642 or LCR and put a cylinder through them every once in a while. I used to do my snubby practice with a used steel Taurus Model 85. Now it's the 9mm version (Model 905). The first 642 that I bought used eventually became unreliable. After I bought a new one, I started doing the vast majority of my practice with cheap steel revolvers. The practice seems to carry over just fine. If you don't reload, the 905 will quickly pay for itself in ammo cost.

Never thought about the less-safe aspect of the Rhino action compared to firing from the top cylinder. My tiny interest in owning one just disappeared. I've had squibs and overloaded ammo before. Doubtless almost all of us have.

 

[MikeInOr]

There is an inherent risk of being maimed or killed when shooting ANY firearm. I believe that risk is miniscule when compared to getting in your car and driving to the grocery store.

 

[CavalierLeif]

@CavalierLeif what model of Chiappa Rhino are you interested in?

I have been debating on getting one in 9mm. My LGS has a few to choose from in .357. Their inventory had a really good selection a few months ago, but they have sold quite a few. There is one in particular that hasn’t moved and the price has been dropped to $979. Not a fantastic bargain but definitely not at $1400 MSRP.
If it was a 4” I would probably buy it, but it’s a 6”. I am not sure if I meet another 6” barreled revolver.
Anyway, it’s this one:

Product Details

www.chiappafirearms.com

They also have a black 2” model in .38/.357 that I like, but I have my eyes on 2 other snub nosed revolvers.

I'm not particularly interested in acquiring one at the moment (have a long list ahead of it), but I am curious

 

[deadeye dick]

This my first impression of the gun and why i would'nt consider one===UGLY

 

[shoebox1.1]

So my buddy is a bottom feeder shooter but always wanted a rhino. So he got the 4 inch ( I believe) looks like stainless steel. We all met up and I’ve got my trr8 and match champion and there’s a table full of glocks and sig’s for all to shoot. I pick up the rhino, notice that my thumbs are closer to forcing cone than I’m used too, adjust that, take aim and at 7 yards DA the first 6 shots- first shot dead nuts in bullseye like a laser beam and 4 more went right around it almost in a cloverleaf group. Damn accurate and easy to shoot. I just can’t get over the looks. Too wild for me