Chiappa Rhino - less safe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kludge

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
2,634
Location
Indiana
I just sent a letter off to American Rifleman...

Dear Editor,

As I was reading the review of the Chiappa Rhino I couldn't help but wonder about its safety. As an engineer I think about such things, and I wonder if the design has been thoroughly tested, specifically with regard to the frame being able to withstand an overcharged cartridge. In the engineering world, if you don't test to failure you really have no idea how strong a design is or what the results of the failure will be. We call this a FMEA (Fault Mode and Effects Analysis).

We have all seen pictures of the aftermath of double charges or of firing another cartridge with a squib stuck in the barrel. Eventually, someone, somewhere will experience this in a Chiappa Rhino, even if using only factory ammunition. It just happens. Before considering this revolver for purchase I would like to see the results of overload testing, specifically revolvers that were tested to failure.

In an overload situation, the design of a standard revolver results in the failure of the top strap and the resulting shrapnel, if you will, will be moving in a more or less upward direction, away from the shooters hand -- not that this is a "safe" situation by any means. In the case of the Rhino, we can assume that the opposite will happen, and the "bottom strap" will give way, directing the shrapnel into the shooters hand, a very different result, with a much increased chance of serious injury.

I would appreciate your comments, and those of the manufacturer.

Sincerely,
kludge
 
Last edited:
In the case of the Rhino, we can assume that the opposite will happen, and the "bottom strap" will give way, directing the shrapnel into the shooters hand, a very different result, with a much increased chance of serious injury.
Click to expand...

You might be overthinking this a little. In an overcharge the top strap gives way not just because it is the closest part of the frame to the cylinder, but because it is relatively thin compared to the rest of the frame. The bottom part of the frame, however, is much more robust because more "meat" is needed to contain the lockwork.

As you say, there's no way to know for sure without testing the gun to destruction, but it wouldn't keep me up at night.
 
On an Engineering Level this is a very good point regarding the Rhino....

Because this will happen! :uhoh:

I have seen the aftermath of Smiths, Rugers, and Colts with the Top Strap missing, and although as stated above that it may very well be due to it being the weakest point of the revolver....It could be the weakest point by design....?

Because of the ones I have seen from my years past....all those shooters still shoot with the same hand!

VERY GOOD POINT! and yes Hideous! :scrutiny:
 
And if my arms were wings and my legs were jet engines would I be a Boeing 737? Come on, anything can happen to any mechanical device. If that is your concern, don't shot anything, all guns can suffer from these types of failures. Dave
 
But the actual design is directing the parts&pressures down instead of up !!

Almost garenteeing a hand/finger injury !!
Click to expand...

The design doesn't direct pressures downward any more than the million and six semi-autos that put your trigger finger as close or closer to the chamber. It must be a slow news day if this is what folks are worried about.
 
The safety issue is the ammunition, not the gun. The responsibility belongs to the person who loads ammunition sensibly or stupidly, not the firearm manufacturer.

That said™, I haven't shot a Rhino yet, nor even handled one, but must admit the look of the gun is growing on me. It makes me think of the old Volkswagen beetle: so homely you almost can't help but like it.
 
But on the auto the pressure is contained somewhat by the frame & blows out the magazine.

Most just endure a numb hand for a few hrs. then a sore hand for a few days .
 
You're really no better shielded by the frame on a semi auto than you would be on the Rhino. Besides, the vast majority of any shrapnel will be going out the sides of the cylinder window.

Each Rhino is already designed to be non-destructively proof tested with a 30% overcharge (CIP standard) at Gardone, so a substantial safety factor has been built in to these guns. Double charges and squibs can occur, but preemptively labeling the Rhino as unsafe is silly.
 
This is actually a very good point. Doesn't make much difference to me because in my opinion it is an over-complicated and hideous answer to a question no one asked.


The design doesn't direct pressures downward any more than the million and six semi-autos that put your trigger finger as close or closer to the chamber. It must be a slow news day if this is what folks are worried about.
Click to expand...
Wrong! The bolt cut is the weak point in any revovler. It is where the catastrophe begins when the gun fails. In a normal revolver, this directs the blast upward. The bolt cut cracks, the top half of the cylinder peels off and takes the topstrap with it. With the Rhino, it will indeed direct the blast downward. This is not to say for sure that it is less safe during a catastrophic failure but it is a valid and very interesting observation either way.
 
You are right that an over pressure situation is inevitable. I'm fairly certain they would have tested to failure, but are highly unlikely to share that information with the public.

I've only seen photos, but it looks like the top strap is still the weakest point on the Rhino as well. I'd guess just from looking at it that if anything would give, the lower front of the cylinder would blow out to one side or the other rather than straight down since the frame below the cylinder looks quite thick. It looks like a very robust design. Don't think I'll ever warm up to that look though.
 
Kludge, that was my first thought when I saw the Rhino for the first time. And I'm not even an Eng., I've just seen enough pictures of revolvers missing their topstrap and the three chambers north of the cylinder pin.

but it is hideous...
Click to expand...

Well maybe my second thought, just after it's looks...:barf:

The only good thing about it's looks...IMO... is that I won't have to worry about a Rhino making my hand into ground beef. Other guns maybe, but not the Rhino.

Wyman
 
Wrong! The bolt cut is the weak point in any revovler.
Click to expand...

Reread my post. I said more than any semi-auto. There's no lack of pictures out there of kaboomed semi-autos that gave way at the frame/magazine well--right where the shooter's hand was. Point being, if we want to work ourselves into a lather about the Rhino, there are plenty of other guns to worry about.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=388424
http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/glock/48514-glock-kaboom.html
http://ingunowners.com/forums/handguns/67551-sig_p220_and_wolf_kaboom-4.html
 
A tempest in a teapot, but if one worry's about damage to your hand if a Rhino goes boom, hands a easy to fix and you have two. Now if you blow off the top hall of your revolver, you put your face and eyes at risk. in any event, try not to stare down the barrel checking that hang fire. Dave
 
Geez, just don't buy one.

And find a hobby away from engineering, you think too much.
 
Get a Grip

First of all - good one, since it doesn't float like a duck. it must be a witch!! Burn it! Second, I doubt there is a single gun out there that has not has some sort of failure - whether caused by the owner or the engineering. Lets not even bring up the the potential carnage of the mishandling of any gun in general. Holy crap, don't buy it if it scares you. I'm saving my $$$ for one.
 
Wow, are we unable, as mature adults, to have an intelligent academic conversation without folks getting their panties in a twist because they think our panties are in a twist??? Would it be okay to discuss catastrophic failures of other types? Has there been a Glock KB thread or two on the `net? Get a grip.
 
I have a Rhino because I thought it was so darn unique. Even came with a leather pancake holster.
Who else that posted here have one?
Not the best picture. No regrets or fears of it blowing up. Only down side is the trigger pull is heavy but different from a cookie cutter gun. Shorter pull.
Unlike a Glock or other makers revolvers for that matter there are no pics or stories of them blowing up on line. Maybe that says something?
Oh I forgot. The world did not end on May 22nd either.


Rhino.gif
 
Last edited:
I looked over one at local gun show. While I feel the gun is perfectly safe to use the complexity of internal components scared me away. The inside looks like mechanism of old hand wound Timex watch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
My 'test fire' review of the Chiappa Rhino revolver
Replies
7
Views
2K
Havok7416
Havok7416
O
  • Locked
Chiappa Rhino
2 3
Replies
55
Views
8K
Uneasy Rider
U
CavalierLeif
Chiappa Rhino?
2
Replies
33
Views
876
halfmoonclip
H
C
  • Locked
Review: Chiappa Rhino & 5 Fire Star Firearms
Replies
7
Views
871
Cinci
C
Havok7416
  • Locked
Chiappa Rhino Range Report
Replies
5
Views
751
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
Back
Top