586 vs Rhino video

SixBanger · #1 07-08-2015, 11:01 AM

Just a quick clip showing the difference in muzzle rise; both were using Federal 357m JHP.

Video:
https://youtu.be/4e8QU3c5wJM

GIF:

Erich · #2 07-08-2015, 11:31 AM

And what are the guns' respective weights . . . ?

SLT223 · #3 07-08-2015, 11:52 AM

I was expecting a video set somewhere in Africa.

kaveman · #4 07-08-2015, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLT223

I was expecting a video set somewhere in Africa.

Me too,.............and I was expecting it to end badly!

Richard Simmons · #5 07-08-2015, 03:33 PM

Looks like a 6" M586 which runs what, 45-46oz? The Rhino appears to be a 5" since it only has three holes/slots in the rib so it's around 32oz according to their website.

The Rhino has a centerline bore compared to the 586 so recoil, regardless of weight is going to be more reward and less upward.

HarrishMasher · #6 07-08-2015, 04:36 PM

The 4" Rhino is super light, under 30 ozs! I had one. The recoil was incredibly mild. But it had problems, I sent it back and the problem persisted and they left every single screw on the gun loose when they returned it. A couple even fell out when I was handling it. Sorry, had to sell that one. Cool gun though and crazy accurate.

Here is an example of the groups I could shoot with it double action 25 feet:

regalsc · #7 07-08-2015, 05:26 PM

I think Hickock 45 did a video on the Rhino & in the video he said it recoiled back into his wrist to where he said he really didn't like it that it was just OK. He likes the conventional recoil better. This is from memory a while ago.

Nightowl · #8 07-08-2015, 06:53 PM

The laws of physics are constant. Lighter gun, more recoil with same load. Lower barrel placement puts more recoil in the hand rather than upward motion of the barrel. Not a bad thing, just different. I'll stick with the Smith.

muzzleblast · #9 07-09-2015, 09:02 AM

Thank you for the post. Nice video of the difference in recoil impulse.

MB

DonD · #10 07-09-2015, 09:57 AM

Doesn’t compensate for being what I consider one of the ugliest guns I’ve ever seen and I seriously doubt the quality/durability of the Rhino are anywhere near the S&W.

Will never sit in my gun safe. Don

sodacan · #11 07-09-2015, 10:03 AM

I don't know about anyone else, but I recoil when I just look at a Chiappa Rhino.

sellersm · #12 07-09-2015, 12:21 PM

Nice video demonstrating the differences in recoil physics!

As to the Rhino, I've never owned one, but have thought about it many times, UNTIL I saw the internal diagram and learned just how complicated its internals are!

Take this with a grain of salt: without exception, everyone that I know who has personally owned one, had to send it back because it broke. HarrishMasher summed up what they all experienced. I think it's just too complicated of a design to work correctly.

Caveat: they may have fixed & updated their internal components and design, if they did, I'm not aware of it.

cal50 · #13 07-09-2015, 12:30 PM

Lower center line of bore to your hand / arm center line = less flip.

I had a TC Contender and firing hot magnum loads in it was punishing vs my revolver in the same caliber.

Engineer1911 · #14 07-09-2015, 01:21 PM

How do you make the World's Ugliest Italian revolver uglier? Add a light rail or is that for adding a bayonet or bipod?

Another piece of objective evidence why the only country Italy has defeated in a war was Ethiopia

.

This is how you make the internal lock look "GOOD" .

357-RevolverGuy · #15 07-09-2015, 02:15 PM

Fun to watch. I'll sacrifice muzzle rise for a more classic revolver line though...

Erich · #16 07-09-2015, 04:13 PM

I like mine a good bit for shooting - the 23-ounce thing is easier to shoot fast than my 40-oz GP-100 . . . however, I share the concerns about the complicated internals. Right now it's one of the house guns, since my wife doesn't mind shooting it.

SixBanger · #17 07-10-2015, 10:57 AM

Thanks all.

Almost forgot the obligatory photo.

series guy · #18 07-10-2015, 11:58 AM

Erich I have to say I like the knife better than the gun!

SixBanger · #19 07-29-2015, 12:25 AM

Haha, can't please everybody.

varmint243 · #20 07-29-2015, 06:40 AM

I shot a Rhino snub at the range a couple weeks ago.
I was not in any way impressed with the gun.
IMO lower quality fit and finish than you get with a Taurus.

SixBanger · #21 12-11-2015, 12:01 PM

Having owned a Taurus revolver, I have to disagree with that statement lol.

Kernel Crittenden · #22 12-11-2015, 02:03 PM

I'd like to see the same slow-mo video with a Rhino and a M686/586 that had the Power Port..... and a M686/586 without the PP. That would be cool, and possibly informative.

dwever · #23 12-11-2015, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Crittenden

I'd like to see the same slow-mo video with a Rhino and a M686/586 that had the Power Port..... and a M686/586 without the PP. That would be cool, and possibly informative.

I have the 586 L-Comp with porting, and only with fairly to very hot particularly Magnum loads does the porting provide a perceptible difference between shooting it and my 627 UDR. Even with the real hot stuff, not that big a difference. That is a good comparison since both guns weigh 37 oz. and change (3" and 2.625" barrels).

On the other hand, with my 50 oz. Model 629 double-slot ported, you can definitely feel big 44 Magnum loads coming straight back in to the palm and not up even before the scope was mounted.

All that to say, I doubt with the M686/586 you'll see much difference.