Fires out of the bottom cylinder vs. the top one. What do you think?
http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2010/01/21/chiappa-rhino-revolvers/
This pistol layout has been around for some time. I have always wondered about it. Not the prettiest pistols - esp by American standards. After all, we gave the world the ‘six-gun.’
Looking at that lockwork - WoW! Rube Goldberg went crazy with the AutoCAD.
+1 on the lockwork comment. Wow. I consider myself a “revolver guy” and this is just the ugliest most unwieldy looking thing ever.
Wow the only thing uglier than that is a camo SIG P250.
Well, for a full size gun, it might be useful in recoil control… But, a snubbie? Really? Your gonna conceal that?
ETA: Just imagine the cankles you’d have after ankle carrying that for a week…
I’ll go out on a limb and say that that is one bad ass looking revolver…and talk about low bore axis, that bore axis is downright subterranean. I like the innovative approach. It looks very ergonomic. I like how they’ve made an attempt to flatten the cylinder. It looks like a big behemoth though.
Good comment about the Rube Goldberg trigger mechanism.
What market are they going for though? Hunters? Competition shooters? Because ultimately it may be a solution in search of a problem.
Its gonna end up in many SyFy movies. Many.
savage looking revolver mate.
Am I looking at this thing right? The hammer is the rear sight? That’s just weird. At least it appears to be in the fourth picture. Take a look at the fifth picture (the cutaway) though and it is obvious that the rear sight is separate.
from what i can tell, the hammer is notched as a rear sight, but you also have the groove running down the top of the revolver.
I’d actually love the opportunity to run one seriously for a while. I love revolvers in general and the good ol’ revolver could certainly benefit from a bit of modernization.
Interesting. Would be fun to shoot one a bit and be able to say you had the opportunity.
To me why change it?
I compare the mechanism on that to a standard revolver and see more chances for something to go wrong.
Yep. Only a mutha could love that!:eek:
Interesting concept. If the low bore axis mitigates muzzle flipping while recoiling as much as one would think I can see some niches. The centerline of the bore has to be at least 3/4 and inch lower than on a comparable revolver.
Good on them for thinking outside the box.
For those of you asking about the hammer doubling as a rear sight, the hammer does not move in double action mode. The internal hammer functions all by it’s self when shooting double action. When shooting in single action mode the external hammer acts like a cocking lever and when released it moves forward into rear sight mode. It has been said this design produces almost “no” muzzle rise and very gentle felt recoil. We shall see.
MadDog 
Ah thanks for the clarification MadDog. I read the article too and, well time will tell.
+1
Smith & Wesson set the standard in 1899 and nobody has been able to exceed it yet. Certainly not these upstarts.
Wow. Not comenting at all on the design other than to say its nice to see another option.
But really? Saying that something like the revolver with its aging roots is beyond evolution, because it is by someone other than a company with american revolver history is a bit much dont ya think?