Chiappa Rhino Revolver .40 S&W
The latest Rhino revolver is chambered in .40 S&W. It is used with full-moon clips to hold the rimless .40 S&W rounds.
Caliber: .40 S&W
Moon Clips: Five come with each revolver
Barrel Lengths: 2, 4, 5 and 6-inch
Basic weight: 25-ounces with a 4-inch barrel
Frame: Ergal (a high-strength aluminum alloy)
Cylinder/barrel 4140 alloy steel.
Metal finish:Blued
Grip:Composite rubber or wood.
Capacity: 6-rounds
Price (MSRP): 2-inch $839; 4-inch $929; 5-inch $949; 6-inch $989.
Also of note is that Rhino is still using their Rhino head logo.
Hellboy, your pistol is ready.
AN ACTUAL RHINO OWNER RESPONDS:
(I actually own 2…)
The early-production 5-inch Rhino (featuring a non-fiber-optic front sight and “meh” trigger) has no space under the grip for an RFID-chip.
My newer 2-inch Rhino (fiber-opitc up front, good trigger) has the pit in the frame for the RFID chip… BUT NOT CHIP.
THE PISTOL WAS SOLD TO ME WITHOUT THE CHIP.
There was no sign, beside the obvious location in the frame where it goes, that it was EVER in the weapon.
I don’t know if this means the importer or the store I bought it from removed it, or Chiappa is separating them at the factory.
(I would post pictures… but that isn’t an option.)
I purchased a 2 inch snubby Rhino in .357 some months ago….it is the best revolver I own….the design reduced the muzzle flip to the extent that a .357 round is easily shot by my novice wife….the snubby is so small that I am carrying it in a custom made IWB holster….great innovation and it is so ugly that I am constantly getting questions at the range….buy one for your wife esp if she is not a regular shooter…saw both the snubby and the 4 inch .40 for sale this weekend at a gunshow for $680
I vote with my dollars and I won’t support any gun company that puts any form of a chip into a firearm out of strong ethical believes. I believe this could set a negative precedent, by tolerating rfid technology in guns and letting this turn into a “industry standard”, no one can say for certainty that future advances in nanotechnology that will replace rfid will be as easily removable or destroyable or won’t morph into something with unpredictable consequences for U.S. gun owners. We as gunowners shouldn’t let this stealthily slide by us(kudos to Steve for finding this out!), by tolerating it we leave room for the anti-gunners to swop in to use it against us in the future. In the words of Norbert Wiener: The capabilities of technology steadily run ahead of our ability to predict and mitigate its consequences. I don’t think the “tinfoil hat paranoid” theory adds up in a constructive way or that someone with genuine concerns about this has no business around firearms, that again plays into the anti-gun crowd worldwide.
good idea, then im going to go ahead and assume that you don’t own a cellphone, laptop with internet, license plates for your car, GPS, credit/debit cards, and any online internet account? or finally, a library card? all of these things can be used to track you in one way or another…
I realize I’m being voted down as the resident tin foil hatter on this topic of rfid. Believe me I understand the software and hardware of this and the myriad ways of how someone can be tracked thru your daily electronic emissions(that’s what we’re talking about here). I’m actually in college perusing a degree in mechanical engineering on the GI bill so let me expand where I’m coming from:
According to Moore’s law the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles every two years (3 years from 2013) meaning roughly that a CPU(non-dual processor) becomes %40 faster every growth cycle. Moore law doesn’t yet relate to rfid chips fully before cpu’s can be miniaturized down enough depending on how far future quantum mechanics and nanotechnology goes however as this accelerating change happens and it will, we could have something like in layman’s terms RFID+CPU+AI capability and whatever else inside a firearm not necessarily in conjunction with the will of the person operating the firearm, because the interface of “human to trigger” is now interrupted with what I would call a “intermediary independent operating system” that could be mandated/tailored by Federal/State laws in the future as they see fit, hence why I oppose rfid and its future outgrowth within a Civilian owned firearm.
The capabilities of technology steadily run ahead of our ability to predict and mitigate its consequences.
543, Im not arguing about the implications of using such technology. This doesn’t address my question that I posted. People that are so concerned with the RFID chip should be concerned with the aforementioned technologies and products I have previously mentioned right?
Based off of what I’ve seen (and heard personally), they don’t seem to be overly concerned…which is puzzling and ironic since the aforementioned products are used everyday to track certain individuals via US Patriot Act.
My point is that if one is truly concerned about tracking, start with what you carry and use everyday if you want to make your fear of tracking valid.
@543
You are forgetting that we are approaching the physical limit of Moore’s Law, not how precise we can engineer things, but how small can a transistor be before it doesn’t hold its state reliably.
Our current tech and any predictable future tech could not possibly implement what you are suggesting in something approaching the size of an RFID.
How would this intermediate system operate? Block the trigger? How? With a mechanical safety? Where does the power for that come from? What prevents me from just removing it (as in the Rhino)?
We are ages from being able to implement such a technology and there has never been a political environment where a law requiring such a technology could be feasible and it is unlikely that there ever will be so long was we can recognize the US for what it is.
The only possible implementation for RFID would be tracking, and limited range and inaccurate at that.
If that ever comes to pass, even an RFID embedded in the stock would be easy enough to remove with a drill.
There is little reason to be upset over an easily removable short range RFID just because you’re afraid of technology that couldn’t even be on the drawing table for years.
New Storage Device Is Very Small, at 12 Atoms
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/science/smaller-magnetic-materials-push-boundaries-of-nanotechnology.html?hp&gwh=4A47D448D015524AC2AACD468EA3BDE7
What everyone is forgetting about RFID in a specific device, is that so far, a computer, smart phone, car, blender, are NOT as controversial as firearms. Developing countries are welcoming communications technology, while the best way to force submission to a tyrannical government is to track and/or confiscate any and all weapons.
Why not put light (or visible laser) above the bore? Why this traditional rail instead of proper utilization of existing space?
PS. Too much fuzz about easily destroyable RFID chip… Your mobile which can spy on your bank account detail is more dangerous than this RFID thing.
Been wondering that myself. I’m a big fan of letting the design do all it’s capable of.
I guess it might make the frame a little weaker, but a well designed housing could work around that.
perhaps the biggest reason is that they’re already expensive for revolvers, and a well-designed laser would only compound that.
Hopefully the Deluxe Integral Light & Laser Rhino will come out next. Now that it’s been pointed out to me, the design begs for it. That’d make it pretty much the perfect backup revolver.
It seems pretty obvious to me that this is aimed towards competition. 40sw is an ideal caliber for uspsa. The low bore axis and five moonclips are also ideal.
Regarding the rfid chip, i am more concerned about retailers using it to ban ccw from their store. Would be easy to integrate into the theft prevention system they already have in the doorway.
That is one ugly handgun. What’s up with that grip? It looks like you could use the thing as a club or an axe…………..why do I kinda like this thing?
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”
- Thomas Jefferson
“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson
Opinions are like ears.
everyone’s got two?
ScottT said: “Seems like they could’ve made it in 10mm while they were at it?”
A real head-scratcher, I agree. One of the pluses or the original Rhino was the caliber they chose, allowing for cheap (.38) or powerful (.357). The parallel to .40SW & 10mm Auto are obvious. I can’t believe it’s an issue of the 10mm being too hot for the frame – the stoutest 10mm is less powerful than full house .357 magnum rounds.
Is it possible that 10mm Auto will fit anyway? The cylinder seems about the same length as the one found in the .38/.357 version, and a 10mm round is shorter than that. Anyone got the scoop?
There’s more than likely a rim in the chambers to keep the cartridge from sliding forward. But it can be machined futher back to accomodate the length of the 10mm case. Was going to have my 610 converted to 10mm magnum by Hamilton Bowen but unfortunately I had to sell it before I even got close to sending it out.
Why they didn’t just make a 10mm could be a couple of reasons. 10mm is not all that popular. .40 S&W is. I’m hoping it’s strictly a marketing thing and not the other possibility. That DT or BB loadings will cause “issues” in a fairly short amount of time. The Rhino has not had enough time for any reputation based on durability.
Doesn’t mean I don’t want one. I’d prefer a larger frame model in .44 mag but I might buy this .40 and convert it to 10mm. Maybe by the end of this year.
I’m thinking the main reason this wouldn’t be feasible in 10mm is the aluminum frame. Look at the listed weight; 25oz. Think of this in terms of the S&W J frame; you can get lower pressure rounds in a lightweight aluminum frame, but for the really high pressure stuff (.357, 10mm) you need to step up to a heavier steel frame, or go with an expensive exotic alloy, like S&W did with Scandium. So yes, making this in 10mm would be easy dimensionally, but you’d need a 35oz steel pistol instead of a 25oz aluminum pistol.
I’d be more interested in the .357 magnum if and when they fix the trigger.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
you really dont lose all that much velocity from the gap
in fact when the nagant revolver was designed it had a mechanism to cam the cylinder froward to close the gap, now paired with the gas seal on the front of the bullet , this allowed a seal and increased velocity, but it wasnt by much and the fact that they use a relativity weak cartridge made the whole gas seal mechanism unnecessary, unless you wanted to put a silencer on it, which they did ;D
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/gaptests.html
the cylinder gap issue has been pretty much discredited as a myth or vast over exaggeration i don’t know which…
thats the beauty of a firearms free market, being able to buy whatever you want to suit your individual needs. I’m not a fan of revolvers, though these Rhinos are a interesting evolution of this old technology.
Lance, you are becoming unbearable.
Seems like they could’ve made it in 10mm while they were at it?
With moon clips, you’re not headspacing off the case mouth like usual for those rimless cartridges, so theoretically it could be done, but I’ve never seen this put to actual use, so there must be some trickiness to it.
Never mind the chip. They need to improve the trigger pull on that beast.
I haven’t been following the Rhino news lately, but everyone who tested it before it went to market said the trigger was great. What happened?
given how the cylinder looks I’d wager 5 shot, not 6 as the article states
The front angle shot is a picture of the snubnosed 5-shot revolver. The side view is a six-shooter.
No, they aren’t. They are both the .357 mag versions in the pic above. And both are 6-shot. The snub image is deceiving but since they don’t make a 5 shot .357…
Anyway, if it were a 5-shot then the purpose for the flat sided cylinder is partly nullified.
As I said the last time this issue came up, I’ll never buy a Chiappa product. Willingness to put a chip in a gun is disturbing. The attitude that lead to installation of chips bothers me more than the chip itself, and destroying the chip after purchasing it doesn’t change the motives of the people who put it there. Giving companies who do things like that seems like a bad idea, and I know I’m not the only person who feels that way.
They make some neat products, so it’s unfortunate that it has to be this way.
*giving money to companies…
Oops.
Well, as they said, you could always wrap your head in tinfoil….
The chips were placed in order to ease with production…thats it. Ease up on the irrational paranoia. Thefirearmblog effectively provided a article about the RFID chips.
I find it fascinating that people are quick to dismiss this company due to rumors, but remain loyal to other gun companies (that will remain unnamed) that have donated and sold arms to agencies and organizations in the US and abroad that trample on the US constitution, Bill of Rights, and international human rights laws. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Agreed.
The company that plans putting RFID chips into guns that can’t be removed?……NO THANKS! Cool gun though, too bad about the RFID stuff.
Pretty sure they came out recently and said to just take the grips off (where the chip is) and stick them in the microwave for 30 seconds. Destroys the chip.
Personally,it doesn’t bother me. I have a cellphone, so the RCMP can find me if they ever feel the need. A chip in a gun won’t anymore then all the other methods.
My concern isn’t so much my local U.S. law enforcement tracking me after-all they issued me a conceal carry license but criminals. I lawfully conceal carry a handgun daily, so for me rfid and the potential of how easily a rfid reader can be coded and modified by criminal parties for example to read rfid specific firearms data is enough for me not ever buy a gun that comes with one or can’t be easily removed/destroyed. I think this might be a unique U.S issue with rfid as most states allow legal conceal carry in some form, tracking might be a concern as most guys and gals who carry don’t want something that can be used to reveal that a person may be carrying a handgun where its legal to carry one.
It seems like most of the people who are really concerned with the RFID chips thing are tin foil hatters who worry about the gubment spying on them all of the time. Do you guys really think you local PD even has the tracking equipment for that or the desire. And do you think the FBI or whoever actually does have the equipment is going to care about some paranoid guy with a CCW permit?
“It seems like most of the people who are really concerned with the RFID chips thing are tin foil hatters who worry about the gubment spying on them all of the time.”
yup pretty much. The gun owning community has a over exaggerated and largely untrue reputation as coddling paranoid types. These type of responses and over exaggerations only antagonizes a few individuals that, in my opinion, have no business owning a gun anyways.
Fair enough, that’s a valid concern.
I had forgotten about the RFID! Thanks for the reminder.