Springfield XD Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,123 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
It may be ugly but it shoot like few other revolvers. I got the six-shot Rhino 200D last September and have fired a few hundred rounds, mostly 38spl. The stubby looking grip is comfortable and the thrust of the recoil feels like a push into your hand and arm with minimal uplift. Even stout .357mag loads are handled remarkable well with the two inch barrel. This version is a double action and while the pull is smooth it is also heavy. The flat cylinder helps with concealability. It looks like the designers let function dictate form and nixed any aesthetic considerations.

Anyone else have experience with Rhino guns?



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,923 Posts
Christ they're ugly.

I wanna shoot one but buy one? There's a lot of nice 586's out there that'll never let that happen me thinks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
No experience with the Rhino, but I shot the Mateba, an automatic revolver which fired off the bottom chamber. It was unique to say the least, but I saw the benefit in keeping the bore centerline as low as possible. I am impressed that Chiappa built their guns with ergonomics and functionality before aesthetics. Unfortunately, some other gun companies have done this in the past and the product has sold poorly. The original Ram Line Exactor 22 pistol is a good example...they had to redesign the grip to make it look more like folks thought it should, even though the tapered grip design (similar to the Rhino's) fits the hand more properly than one which flares at the bottom.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,430 Posts
i think they look cool.
i havnt had any experience with them, but they are on my "seriously consider buying" list.
i heard a tactics guy say that if you depress the barrel against a target (like in a scuffle) it impedes the rotation of the cylinder, and stops the firing.
i havnt had a chance to test it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,867 Posts
I've looked at them, besides the obvious "holy crap that's ugly" reaction they don't seem nearly as nice as a good SW and priced way too high. Plus zero resale value.

To each it's own but I'd pass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,123 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
No doubt the Rhino has a different appearance than traditional revolvers. The two inch barrel lends itself to a self-defensive firearm that can quickly put rounds on target without the lift associated with traditional revolvers. It's curious how low bore axis is a desirable quality in semi-autos but not so much with the revolver folks.

I don't know enough about resale value except to say I bought this used and one I looked at months previously sold within a week.



I picked this old S&W 442 last year with the under barrel design. It's a fine shooting 22LR.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,867 Posts
Not trying to pick on the Rhino, I love wheel guns and I say the more the merrier. But I also go to a lot of gun shows and hang out with dealer friends of mine who won't even buy them used anymore because they're so hard to sell, while on the other hand a good SW revolver is like gold on their tables. People in droves will stop to look at them, handle them, maybe make an offer. A Ruger will do good as well although not as good as the SW's. I had a GP100 that I worked on the trigger on and it sold in half a day and he's asking me to do more for him and I will if he buys used ones for me to work on (obviously I can't buy new to resell, I'm not an FFL). My other point is the bore axis argument is over-rated in my book anyway, and I've heard it on semi autos and revolvers for years. Mass of the gun has way more to do with felt recoil than bore axis, and even though the Rhino does have less perceived recoil than an SW it's just not enough to give up other SW advantages for.


This is all just one guys opinion, and my opinion + $1.00 is worth something less than $1.00 so take it for what it's worth.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top