Monday, August 01, 2011 Filed in:
General gun
stuff, Shooting
industry
You've probably heard about the flap MKS Distributing caused last
week. MKS, a former promoter of Charter Arms, is the primary
distributor for Chiappa guns - including the Rhino revolver.
Chiappa disclosed that starting in 2012 all their guns would carry
an RFID chip. The chip is attached at the time of manufacture, and
presumably contains information such as the gun's serial number,
place of origin, lot number, and that sort of thing. Because it's
applied at the factory, it can't contain any data on the eventual
purchaser.
I can see why Chiappa would want to do this, even if their
government wasn't requiring them to: it makes for more accurate
inventory of a controlled item. While a barcode on a box ensures
that the box is present, it doesn't say anything about the
contents. The RFID tag allows inventory of actual units, as opposed
to the boxes which surround them. Were I in that business, I'd
probably consider something similar to prevent what is termed
"leakage" - mysterious disappearances from stock.
RFID inventory tags are not new, but their application to firearms
is. It's this novelty, the potential for abuse, and how their
distributor has handled the news which is causing problems.
When the news hit the blogosphere, some of which contained rampant
and ill-informed speculation, the distributor (through their PR
agent - with whom I am familiar and not all that fond)
sent out a scathing release
belittling not
just the public's fears but also the blogger's
concerns. It was that haughty and
scornful statement which has turned the public against Chiappa and,
by extension, MKS. The release, obviously intended to quash rumors,
contained some erroneous information of its own.
There are, as I see it, two relevant facts. First, the RFID chip
contains information about the gun, and only about the gun. It
contains nothing about the purchaser or user. Second, an RFID chip
can in fact be read at a considerable distance, although the extent
of such reading is a matter of debate. I think it's generally
accepted that a read distance of a few yards is easily doable, much
more than the “2-3 inches” that MKS/Chiappa
insists.
Beyond those two facts, nothing is clear. Could an RFID chip be
used in the future as some sort of marker for a concealed weapon?
Possibly. Could they be used to track a buyer? That might be a bit
overblown, but the technology exists. Is it happening now, or could
it in the near future? Not probable. Could legislation be
introduced tomorrow requiring all guns without an RFID chip be
destroyed to facilitate some draconian tracking scheme? Extremely
unlikely. That’s not to say it couldn’t happen, mind
you, but I don’t think it’s worth your or my time to
worry about. At least, not at the current stage of
implementation.
It's the attitude, the dismissive manner in which the concerns of
the buying public were addressed that's really at issue. Many
people are calling for a boycott of MKS/Chiappa for that
reason.
I find this amusing, inasmuch as Smith & Wesson - through their
owners, Saf-T-Hammer Inc. - foisted a dubious internal locking
system on the public and similarly (though far more politely)
dismissed buyer's concerns over the efficacy and reliability of the
mechanism. Many people, including yours truly, called for a boycott
of S&W. It didn't happen, at least to any meaningful degree,
and today their business is booming. What's more, you can go to any
gun forum and find lots of people who proclaim in the face of
evidence to the contrary that the locks are just fine. That’s
what happens when corporate blunders are well handled.
People will find a reason to buy what they want to buy; giving them
that reason is the job of the PR people, but sometimes that effort
backfires - like it did here. Based on my past interaction with all
three parties involved, I’m not surprised.
MKS and Chiappa are very small companies and I doubt that they can
easily weather the storm that their inept PR has brewed. This faux
pas may be the end of their aspirations in the American market, but
I think it's a little silly for us to manufacture a reason not to
buy their products when the flaws of those products should be
reason enough to avoid them.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver, bloggers
Wednesday, November 24, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers, Gunsmithing
One of the features that Chiappa touts about the Rhino are the
roller bearings used in the action. The Rhino has four such
bearings, two each on the hammer spring lever and the return
lever:

The picture shows the back (underside) of the two parts, because
the rollers are not visible when installed in the gun. (Please
refer to pictures from previous episodes showing these parts
installed in the Rhino.)
Each lever has a captured roller bearing on which an arm of the
mainspring rides. The other roller on each is on an open pin, and
the rollers are easily removed. (They're also easy to lose when
installing the parts in the gun, unless they've been greased ahead
of time and thus stuck to their pins as they're assembled.)
The mainspring rollers ride along the surface of the wire torsion
mainspring. As the parts move they slide up and down the
mainspring; if the rollers weren't there this sliding would a
source of significant friction. This approach isn't completely
successful, however, due largely to how the rollers are
constructed.
Because the surface of the rollers is flat the mainspring can ride
from side to side. At virtually no time does the mainspring
not rub on the sides that
contain the rollers, and this means friction. If the roller
bearings are designed to reduce friction, they are only partially
successful.
There is another potential downside to this design. Though I had no
problems in testing, there exists the possibility - however remote
- that the mainspring could "jump the tracks" and come off the
roller. If that happened the gun would be non functional until
disassembled. This is not dissimilar to a rare condition faced by
the trigger return spring in the small frame Dan Wesson revolvers,
which on occasion would slip off its saddle on the trigger, tying
up the gun. Again, I haven't seen nor heard of any problem, but
having experience with a revolver which on occasion does exhibit
such a weakness I'd prefer that Chiappa err on the side of
prevention.
The solution found for the Dan Wesson may be useful in the Rhino:
make the part with a groove in which the mainspring can ride. This
would ensure that the mainspring is always following the most
friction-free path, and would make it much less likely that the
mainspring could be forced off track.
The other two rollers transmit the mainspring power to other
operating parts. The hammer spring lever's roller rides in a slot
on the hammer (clearly visible in earlier pictures.) The roller
bearing is always pushing on the side of that slot to power the
hammer, and sliding back and forth as the hammer moves. Were it not
for the roller bearing, this sliding - under the full force of the
mainspring - would make the gun much more difficult than it already
is to cock in either single or double action.
The other roller, on the return lever, pulls the lifting lever
(hand) back to the rest position as the trigger is released. This
force is transmitted back through the action, working against the
leverage of the parts, to reset the entire lockwork. Excess
friction at this point could cause the trigger to stick during
reset, and that's what the roller is designed to prevent.
Given their importance to the design, I was surprised to find that
the machining quality wasn't as good as the rest of the gun. The
operating surfaces of the bearings were surprisingly rough and no
doubt generated more friction than they probably should. In
addition the bearings were quite sloppy on their pivots, which
raises the possibility of backlash and attendant friction losses.
This sloppiness also contributes to the mainspring friction problem
detailed above, as the rollers get pushed to one side and create a
trough in which the mainspring rides.
Closely fitted bearings with perfectly smooth surfaces should
result in small but noticeable changes to the operating effort that
the Rhino requires, as well as helping to smooth the very gritty
trigger return the gun exhibits. Though I haven't analyzed this
from a strength of materials standpoint, replacement bearings
carefully made from impregnated bronze might be an excellent choice
to improve the Rhino's function.
I hope this teardown of the Chiappa Arms Rhino revolver has been
useful to you! If you haven't listened to my ProArms Podcast
interview about the Rhino pop over to their site and listen
- there's a lot
to say about my shooting experience with this unusual revolver. If
you're a United States Concealed Carry Association member, check
out my review in the next issue of Concealed Carry Magazine. (Not a
member? You
should be!)
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
I recently recorded an interview for the ProArms Podcast,
and it's been released. The first half is the
ProArms gang discussing the Rhino, and the second half is my
discussion with Gail Pepin about the gun. If you've been waiting to
find out what I really thought about the Rhino, have a
listen!
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: proarms, rhino.revolver, classes, combat.focus
Wednesday, November 17, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers, Gunsmithing
First let's take a look at the assembled action for some
perspective:

The mainspring serves two functions. Through the Hammer Spring
Lever, it powers the hammer to fire the rounds, and through the
Return Lever it resets the trigger and all the internal mechanisms.
This is not different conceptually than the single spring used in a
traditional "V"-spring Colt, or the single coil spring used in the
Ruger Redhawk - though it is substantially more complicated than
either of those.
The Hammer Spring Lever and the Return Lever share a common pivot
pin, and the mainspring is held under tension between them. The
mainspring forces the Hammer Spring Lever to rotate
counter-clockwise, while it simultaneously applies force to the
Return Lever in a clockwise direction. Taking out the unnecessary
parts for clarity, we can get a better look at how the Return Lever
functions:

The Return Lever's force is clockwise, and as a result is always
trying to pull the Lifting Lever (what everyone else calls a
'hand') downward. The Lifting Lever has a hook shape at its bottom
end, which curls around a projection on the underside of the Return
Lever. The Interlink Lever has a projection on its left end, which
also has a peg on the underside. This peg fits into a hole in the
Lifting Lever.
The Cylinder Stop Lever projects up through the frame and engages
the notches on the cylinder, locking it in place so that the
chamber is aligned with the barrel. As the trigger is operated, the
Interlink Lever rotates clockwise; a rounded projection on its
right side fits into a semi-circular recess in the Cylinder Stop
Lever. As the projection moves downward it pulls the Cylinder Stop
Lever with it, releasing the cylinder so that it can turn.

The Interlink Lever, connected to the Lifting Lever through the
hidden pin on its backside, also transmits its clockwise rotation
to the Lifting Lever, causing it to rise. The Lifting Lever has a
finger that projects through the frame (in a more-or-less
conventional fashion), engaging the unlocked cylinder and rotating
it.

As the trigger completes its travel and the gun has fired, the
shooter relaxes pressure on the trigger. The Return Lever - now
under a fully tensioned mainspring - rotates clockwise, the
projection on its right side engaging the large "C" on the Lifting
Lever and pulling it back down to the rest position. The Lifting
Lever pushes the Interlink Lever downward (counter-clockwise),
which in turn pushes the trigger back to its home position.
If your head isn't swimming yet you may have a future as a Rhino
gunsmith!
The mechanism is full of friction points, and the only way this
guns works as well as it does is because of how those friction
points are handled. In the final installment of this series, we'll
look at what makes all this complication possible: the Rhino's
unique roller bearing system.
Tune in next Wednesday!
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Wednesday, November 03, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers, General gun
stuff
One of the things that struck me when I first opened the Rhino is
that the trigger doesn't directly
do anything. In every other
double action revolver the trigger directly contacts the hammer in
both single and double action, but not the Rhino!
In a traditional revolver's single action the sear (which is
usually a pointed projection on the trigger) drops into some sort
of notch on the hammer. When the trigger is pulled, the sear slips
out of the hammer notch, allowing the hammer to be propelled by the
mainspring and fire the cartridge. This system has persisted with
only minor change for over a century. It's a simple, robust method
that's easy to make and easy to maintain.
It's not nearly so simple on the Rhino.


Take a good look at the
pictures, because this gets very complicated very quickly!
The Rhino is cocked, as we learned last time, by pulling back the
external hammer, which pushes the cocking lever down, which pushes
the hammer spring lever down against the tension of the mainspring.
The hammer spring lever draws the hammer back.
At this point, the long extension on the front (right) side of the
hammer slips past the spring-loaded single action lever (aka
'sear'); the single action lever springs back (counter-clockwise),
trapping the hammer in the cocked position.
When the trigger is pulled, it pushes on the connecting rod which
is connected to the interlink lever. (These are all official
Chiappa part names!) The interlink lever and the single action
lever share a common pivot point, and are separated by a phosphor
bronze washer (not seen in these pics.) As the interlink lever
rotates clockwise, a small pin on it contacts the downward-pointing
extension on the single action lever, pushing the extension and
causing the sear surface to rotate upwards and slip off the hammer
extension. The hammer is now free to rotate clockwise, propelled by
the mainspring through the hammer spring lever, which brings the
top of the hammer into contact with the frame-mounted firing
pin.
Got that?
It's an extremely complicated way to approach the function, though
those familiar with high-end rifle triggers, which typically use a
series of levers to do the same task, will recognize what the Rhino
is doing. Those more familiar with handguns will be left staring at
the pictures, scratching their heads, and saying "what the ****?"
(It very much reminds me of the operation of a Hermle chiming
clock, a mechanism with which I am intimately familiar. I’ll
leave it to you to decide if that is good or bad.)
In the next installment we'll have a peek at how double action
works. It's a little more conventional, but still unique.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Monday, November 01, 2010 Filed in:
Techniques &
Training, Revolvers, My
Life
Whew! What a week I had! I’m actually glad it's Monday, as I
might finally be able to catch my breath!
I spent a few days last week helping to teach a Combat Focus
Shooting Instructor Development (CFSID) course in Washington (as in
'state', as in WA.) We had a great group, all of whom were there to
learn how to teach progressive, reality-based shooting in both the
public and private sectors. Rob Pincus was the lead instructor, and
I had the pleasure of interacting with three other Combat Focus
instructors who were also there to help out. Teaching something is
the best way to learn the subject, thus teaching how to teach makes
one a better teacher. (Seems almost circular, doesn't it?)
---
One of the take-aways from this session was a new way of looking at
the concept of precision in combat. You'll be hearing more about
this as I flesh out my thoughts.
----
Speaking of Combat Focus Shooting, I've received a number of emails
showing interest in booking classes for next year. Some of them
have been from sunny or very scenic locations out of state, which
is much appreciated, but I'm also looking to do more courses here
in Oregon. If you'd like to see either Combat Focus Shooting or my
Revolver Doctrine class come to your town, let me know - perhaps
you could be the one to host it!
Here's something to consider: host a Revolver Doctrine class on a
Saturday, followed immediately by a Fundamentals of Combat Focus
Shooting class on Sunday. The former teaches you how to run your
revolver properly, while the latter shows you how to use it
efficiently to protect yourself. It's a great one-two
combination!
If you're interested, email me for the details. (Remember that
while I love teaching in Oregon, I will travel in the Western
states to hold classes.)
-----
Last week was particularly full because I was working feverishly to
finish my Chiappa Rhino review for Concealed Carry Magazine.
Deadline was Sunday, and I managed to slip in under the wire. The
review turned out to be very long - over 3600 words - and I'm
concerned that it will need to be heavily edited to fit into the
magazine's allotted space. (Lots of pics, too.) My editor at CCM,
Kathy Jackson, has her work cut out for her!
I'll be posting the next installment of the blog's series covering
the technical features of the Rhino on Wednesday. Coincidentally,
I'll be recording an interview about the Rhino with the ProArms
Podcast folks that day. I'll certainly let you know when that gets
released.
----
One of last week's frustrations was my outgoing mail server. It
stopped accepting my login name and password, thus no mail went out
for about four days. Qwest's technical support (the pride of
Bangalore) was of no use: "I'm sorry that you're not happy with
your service, Mr. Cunningham. First I'd like you to turn off your
computer and turn it back on again." I swear that if you called
them instead of dialing 911, they'd respond to your request for an
ambulance by telling you to turn your computer off!
I tried valiantly to get them to escalate my call to someone who
wasn't translating a script from Hindi to falsely accented Southern
American English. I failed. The problem finally resolved itself
sometime Saturday. For that I am grateful, even if a bit
puzzled.
----
On a personal note, I'm very happy that tomorrow evening all of the
campaign advertisements will cease. (How do you tell when a
politician is lying? When his lips are moving!)
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver, combat.focus, classes
Monday, October 25, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers, General gun
stuff
Quick: is this Rhino cocked, or not?

As it happens, it is. The "hammer" that you see isn't a hammer at
all. Since the gun fires from the bottom chamber of the cylinder,
the hammer is buried deep within the frame. Since the hammer is
inaccessible, to cock it for single action requires that something
reach down into the works. That something is called the cocking
lever, and it's connected to the thing that looks like a hammer but
isn’t - but which, confusingly, is called the external
hammer.

To cock the gun, the external hammer is pulled back; it pushes the
cocking lever down, which certainly looks like it’s connected
to the internal hammer - but it's not! The cocking lever actually
works by forcing a piece called the hammer spring lever down. The
hammer spring lever in turn rotates the hammer back, thereby
cocking the gun. When the gun is cocked, a spring on the external
hammer returns it to the rest position, pulling the cocking lever
back up with it while the other parts stay in the cocked position.
A red flag on the left top of the frame (which was cleverly not
shown in the first picture) is pushed up by the hand (which they
call a ‘lifting lever’ ) to let the user know the gun
is cocked. You can see that part if you look carefully for the red
line just under and to the right of the external hammer.
When the Rhino is cocked, the external hammer is held in the
forward position under spring pressure. To decock the gun, it is
pulled back and held while the trigger is pulled. Then the user
allows the external hammer to slowly and carefully return to the
rest position.
What's interesting is that the key to this whole operation is the
cocking lever. If one wants to render his/her Rhino double action
only, it's a simple matter of removing the sideplate and pulling
out the cocking lever:

It simply lifts out of the works. The sideplate is replaced, and
the gun is now DAO. The external hammer can still be manipulated
(remember that it has its own spring to keep it in the forward
position), but since there is nothing connecting it to any other
part of the gun it performs no function. Actually, that's not quite
true - since the rear sight is a notch machined into the external
hammer, it still serves as the rear sight.

Next time we'll take a look at the Rhino's very different single
action sear (bet you can’t spot it) and how it works.
It’s anything but straightforward!
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Wednesday, October 20, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers, General gun
stuff
By now everyone knows about the Rhino's unique hexagonal cylinder,
but it's unusual in more ways than the shape. The extractor (star
or ratchet, depending on the maker) on the Rhino is quite different
in execution than any S&W, Colt, Ruger, Dan Wesson, or
Taurus.
The orthodox method of making an extractor is to cut half circles
to accept the cartridges, and mill cam surfaces in the center so
that the hand can rotate the cylinder. The extractor does double
duty, as it were.
Those cam surfaces are responsible for both rotating the cylinder
and locking it in a precise position when the gun fires. The
extractor must stay in perfect relation to each chamber if
barrel-chamber alignment is to be maintained. If the extractor
rotates even slightly relative to the cylinder, the chambers won't
come to the exact position for every shot, and in severe cases an
out-of-time condition can be caused.
The common method of maintaining that alignment was to insert a
couple of steel pins (very small pins!) into the web between
opposite chambers, and drill the extractor arms to fit over those
holes. That requires precise machining and fitting, two things
which have become cost prohibitive.
In recent years S&W has approached the problem by simply
machining the outline of the extractor, and the cylinder recess
into which it fits, into something resembling a square. This is not
an entirely satisfactory approach, as there is significant play
between the two pieces. Ironically, that's what the machining is
supposed to prevent!
Because of this sloppy fit, modern Smiths must be timed with fired
casings in the chambers, which immobilizes the extractor. The
downside is that if live ammo is undersized, the extractor is free
to rotate and the problems come back.
Chiappa decided on a very expensive method to obtain barrel/chamber
alignment. They took the alignment pin idea, and instead of using
them to fix the extractor they inserted four more, and use those as
cams to rotate the cylinder! The extractor is drilled to simply fit
over the pins, and serves only to push empties out of the
gun.

(This concept of separation of function will show up later when I
detail how the double- and single-action sears work.)
Chiappa's method has the advantage of taking all extractor movement
out of the equation. The disadvantages include a) they are not
easily adjusted if chamber/barrel alignment is off, and b) the
system is very expensive to produce.
The first disadvantage is evident in the gun I'm reviewing: two of
the chambers are ever-so-slightly off, and a correction will not be
easy. Keep in mind that the amount of discrepancy is very small,
and doesn't apparently affect the accuracy of the gun to a great
degree, but the error does exist. The first gun, which I sent back
because of a very heavy trigger, did not have the error.
The second disadvantage doesn't seem to concern them, as we saw in
the previous article on their breechface insert. Again, the
machining is quite well done, despite the slight error noted.
If properly done, this design would make for very precise and
repeatable chamber indexing, but if extreme care isn’t taken
in execution that pursuit of perfection can result in a permanent
deficiency. This is not unlike Colt versus S&W cylinder
locking: the more precise Colt requires more care in manufacture
and maintenance, while the sloppier S&W mechanism makes for a
more tolerant system. Both have advantages and disadvantages that
the gun designer balances to get the desired performance
characteristics.
In the next installment we'll dive into the internals, starting
with the hammer that isn’t a hammer - and you might be amazed
at what it takes to render the gun double action only.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Monday, October 11, 2010 Filed in:
Revolvers
Today I’m starting my promised technical evaluation of the
new Chiappa Arms Rhino revolver. This will be strictly an analysis
of how the gun is constructed and how it functions; my full
shooting review, including my evaluation of its suitability for
self defense, will appear in an upcoming issue of Concealed Carry
Magazine. (The review will be a must-read for anyone interested in
the Rhino; I’ll be covering some aspects of the gun that
you’re not likely to find anywhere else. If you’ve been
thinking about joining
the USCCA and getting their superb
magazine, now would be a good
time!)
I received the Rhino some weeks ago, but had to return it and
request another. There was a serious issue with the action on the
first gun, as it had a pull that I estimated at 17 lbs. (I say
estimated because my digital gauge only goes to 12 lbs, and it
pegged out before the trigger even started to move!) An email to
someone who I know had also gotten a Rhino for evaluation said that
his example definitely didn't display that behavior. I concluded
that the problem wasn't one of design but rather of production, and
gave them a second chance.
The replacement arrived last week and is much better. I’m not
holding it against the gun, as I’ve had out-of-the-box
S&W and Ruger revolvers that displayed the same issue. In fact,
I just recently sent a brand-new GP100 back to the factory for just
that problem!
From a technical standpoint the Rhino is very interesting. The
lockwork is complicated and very unusual, but that’s not all.
The gun contains many examples of a decidedly unusual approach to
building a revolver.
I’ll start my technical evaluation by saying that the
engineering on the Rhino is typically Italian, and I mean that in a
good way (as opposed to "typically British", which people usually
take to mean the opposite. With good reason, I might add.) Having
owned and worked on Italian cars and motorcycles I've grown used to
how the Italians approach an engineering challenge, and while one
can always find things to complain about, there are also things
that make you smile and think “now THAT''S neat!" The Rhino
is like that.
Take, for instance, the way the frame is constructed. The entire
gun is made from an aluminum alloy, like a S&W Airweight. The
breechface area of such guns, where the firing pin protrudes and
the cylinder locks into place, is often subject to excessive wear
(see my article at the Personal Defense
Network for a discussion.) In brief,
the relatively soft aluminum wears prematurely, leading to
headspacing, endshake, and cylinder lockup problems in guns that
see a lot of use.
Chiappa came up with an interesting solution: make the breechface
removable, and construct it from steel! Their breechface (red
arrow) is polished smooth, nicely blued, and fits into the frame
very precisely. It hangs off to each side of the frame, serving as
the cartridge shields as well, and is quite thick - on the order of
.300”.

The machining necessary to do this definitely adds to the cost of
producing the Rhino, but it's a good way of ensuring that an
aluminum gun will have a very long service life. I was surprised
that they bothered, because no one else does and nobody would have
thought twice if they hadn’t.
Next time we’ll take a look at their unique extractor star
and the unintended consequences of precision.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Wednesday, September 08, 2010 Filed
in:
General gun
stuff, Revolvers
The FedEx guy was just here and dropped this into my lap:


I’ll be doing a technical analysis here, and a shooting
review for Concealed Carry Magazine. Stay tuned!
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver
Monday, January 25, 2010 Filed in:
Shooting
industry, Revolvers, Accessories
A
LITTLE BIRDIE TOLD ME - Frankly, I've never found
much of a use for Twitter - until last week, when I started
following tweets related to the SHOT Show. It was one of those
140-character messages that lead me to these:

They're from a company in Turkey called, appropriately
enough, handmadegrips.com. The grips are of ebony,
while the designs are inlaid metal and mother-of-pearl. While they
may not be something you'd want to carry on a daily basis, you have
to admire the superb craftsmanship. They'd be great for a
presentation piece, or perhaps to commemorate an important
milestone. Prices are incredibly reasonable, bordering on a
steal.
MORE
ABOUT THE CHIAPPA RHINO REVOLVER - First is
this take from "Richard" at Guns, Holsters, and
Gear.
Then there's this counterpoint from Massad
Ayoob.
Since I haven't handled one I'll sit on the sidelines, but the
stark difference in opinion is intriguing.
HUH??
-
I'm not quite sure
what to make of these. (Now it could be that I've
been married too long, but if my memory is correct and my
supposition of the target market is accurate, they should have a
fur lining...)
NOW
THIS I CAN GET BEHIND - I don't own any Magpul
products, but their new iPhone case may be my first.
Unfortunately it only fits the 3g/3GS, not my Original iPhone, but
I've been meaning to upgrade anyhow. As Caleb over at Gun Nuts Media says,
"now that there’s an iPhone case that makes hippies cry,
I’m all in."
LAUNCH PARTY - The Personal
Defense Network held an official launch
party at SHOT, and from what I'm hearing the industry response was
terrific. If you haven't seen it yet, head on over and check it
out. (Hey, join in the new forums while you're there!)
SOMETHING YOU WON'T SEE ANYWHERE ELSE - I conned
Gila
Hayes into visiting the Chiappa
booth, and she managed to get this great shot of the Rhino's open
cylinder:

This gives a much better perspective on the cylinder's shape. Note
the crane lock sticking down from the topstrap, where the barrel
would be on a normal revolver. Also note the unusual design of the
ratchet.
(The Chiappa folks wouldn't let Gila dry fire or even handle the
gun; the female person holding it is a Chiappa employee. One is
left to wonder why an anonymous blogger got to play with it, while
a well-known trainer and author - a person who's held highly
visible positions in the industry for years - got the cold
shoulder?)
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: shot.show, grips, rhino.revolver, personal.defense.network
The 2010 SHOT Show is just getting started. I've compiled some of
the more interesting (to me) tidbits about Day One from around the
'net:
S&W
GOES TO THE DARK SIDE: I'm surprised that there's
not more noise about the new Bodyguard .38. It's a real departure
for S&W, having a cylinder that rotates clockwise like a Colt,
an integral laser sight, and an ambidextrous cylinder release.
There's a good picture of it at Massad
Ayoob's blog.
THE
RHINO GOES PUBLIC: Chiappa is showing the Rhino
revolver in short and long barrels. Here's a pic from Jeff Quinn at Gunblast
- those wood
grips look great!
A
DARN SIGHT BETTER: S&W has introduced a
version of the 640, one of my favorite guns, with very prominent
tritium sights. While I'm relatively agnostic with regards to
glow-in-the-dark feature, the large front and deep rear blades
sights should erase one of the Centennial's few criticisms.
Again, a good pic from Gunblast. (Are my eyes deceiving me,
or is there no internal lock??!)
FLYWEIGHT
SHOTGUN: Mossberg has introduced the
Model 510, which is a very scaled-down pump shotgun chambered in
.410 and 20 gauge. According to Mas Ayoob, it "weighs only five
pounds, if that." As you may recall I'm a big fan of the 20 gauge,
and I'll be interested in taking a look at this. (Mas' picture
makes it look tiny, but the guy holding it isn't exactly a
lightweight...)
UH-OH:
It wasn't all
milk and honey for S&W. The FBI arrested 21 people at SHOT,
including a S&W sales exec, for violating the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act. The indictments were handed down on December 11, but
only unsealed yesterday. (Interesting choice of timing and venue,
don't you think?) Note the second line of the Reuters story: "21 arrested at Las Vegas
gun show" Naaah, no message being sent to the masses there...
COLT
OPENS THE DOOR??: Check out this little
tidbit, courtesy of Massad Ayoob:
"A Colt exec told me
that rumors of a new double action revolver from this fabled old
company are false…for now. He indicated, however, that both
plans and equipment are in place for this to happen, somewhere down
the road."
This doesn't sound like the Python is coming back, but it's
intriguing nonetheless.
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: shot.show, s&w, rhino.revolver, sights, colt
Wednesday, September 30, 2009 Filed
in:
Revolvers
From the Firearms Blog comes the news that Emilio
Ghisoni's "Rhino" revolver is going to make it into
production. The gun was first shown,
with little or no explanation, at the German IWA show a number of
years back. Chiappa Firearms apparently picked up the design from
Ghisoni, and plans to introduce it next year.

Ghisoni is the owner and chief designer at
Macchine Termo Ballistica in Pavia, Italy. The company
is better known by its acronym MATEBA, the brand under which the
MTR8, 2006M, and Unica 6 revolvers were all sold. I do not yet know
if they Rhino will carry the Mateba brand.
(A quick rant: the people who use 'Mateba' as a synonym or
replacement for the model 'Unica' annoy the heck out of me. Mateba
is the brand, Unica is the model. It's like referring to Word,
Excel, or PowerPoint as simply "Microsoft." Yes, it's petty, but
I'm complicated. Ask my wife.)
The Rhino looks like an interesting gun, and is certainly the most
practical of Ghisoni's designs. Don't get me wrong, I like the MTR8
and would love to own one, but it's hardly a practical gun:

The Rhino, on the other hand, might be a viable carry piece. We'll
just have to wait and see!
-=[
Grant ]=-
Tags: rhino.revolver