Chiappa for EDC?

>>32236212

Though they're good guns. And you named many good qualities that make them good for carry...

Firing 357 ain't it. You get extreme amounts of recoil and hardly much more speed out of such a small barrel.

Really I don't even see the point in +P either

>>32236212
you might have a case for the width but I can't imagine it's less width than a single stack 9mm or .380.

.357 magnum isn't an amazing edc round. Especially with a 2" barrel.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html

And revolvers aren't necessarily more reliable than any other handgun.

I'd CC one; but there are better options for sure. What you have to ask yourself is: will it work for your intended purposes

would using it with .38 special work better? and I think revolvers are definitely more reliable, if you have a dud you can just pull the trigger again, with a semi auto you have to clear the round.

>>32236394

Yeah, slap on a .38 special and now you have a great CC gun with the right round.

Personally I carry a small J-Frame revolver for my EDC, it's an airweight Smith model so I even forget it's there, and I have a laser on it, god damn lasers really do help improve your aiming 10 fold for quick shooting or one handed shooting.

>>32236394
>and I think revolvers are definitely more reliable

The problem is that when a revolver malfunctions it's completely dead. There's pretty much nothing you can do short of completely taking it apart.

As opposed to just racking the slide which clears 99.9% of malfunctions.

There's a reason why people who fight for a living don't use revolvers.

File: XbjxYGD.jpg (2MB, 3663x2535px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3663x2535px

>>32237605
Imagine getting a bit of mud in there

>>32236212
My backup gun at work is a little sw .357 j frame (until i find a blue label dealer to that can get me a g43) and i carry it with .38 spl +P because to be honest .357 out of a small, light gun with short barrel has annoying recoil. Its not even the hair on your chest recoil. Nonetheless it does have the fuck you factor

>>32237641
>Imagine getting a bit of mud in there
>In a CC weapon
>In a design that makes it pretty hard to get in there

Cmon man

File: 1478857910927.jpg (15KB, 301x301px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 301x301px

>>32236212
Nigger! Pizza...chicken and poop. That's what I fucking think of their shit tits guns.

>>32236296
Not with a rhino, the whole selling point is the low recoil

File: 000_0996.jpg (487KB, 1037x867px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 1037x867px

fires .40 short and weak, too.

>>32237641
No more complex than any other DA/SA revolver.

>>32236212
Plus it makes you feel like you're walking around in a william gibson novel. Win-win!

>>32236394
You could also just pull the trigger twice with any DA capable semi-auto.

Muh reliability is fuddlore, revolvers are complicated and full of moving parts. There is no appreciable difference between revolvers and semi-autos as far as general reliability goes, what's important is that you use good ammo and maintain your firearm.

File: polymer-Chiappa-rhino.jpg (41KB, 620x363px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 620x363px

FYI there's a polymer .38 Spl only version that's lighter

>>32237605
>The problem is that when a revolver malfunctions it's completely dead. There's pretty much nothing you can do short of completely taking it apart.
chances of a revolver jamming that hard are just as likely as a semi auto jamming that hard. It's absolutely no reason to discount a revolver

>There's a reason why people who fight for a living don't use revolvers.
because semi autos hold more and reload faster. Not because of 4chan revolver jamming myths

>>32239562
>chances of a revolver jamming that hard are just as likely as a semi auto jamming that hard

I'd like to see some mud and sand tests please.

>>32236212
I have the 4 inch Rhino.
I constantly have problems firing. IE the cylinder gets jammed and won't rotate after firing a round. The lever cannot be pulled to release it, the "hammer" will not pull and the tigger will not either to rotate chambers. You have to slap it to pop it out.
For this design flaw alone in tune with shit tier customer support I can NEVER recommend a rhino for EDC, SHTC, or self defense.
This is a shame because the recoil handling thanks to the barrel placement is divine.

>>32239652
Not much info online. There are only two mud tests and nothing else on youtube - S&W 686 worked, M1917 failed when it gets mud inside from the hammer. Found some written stuff about a guy testing a S&W Model 10 with mud, sand, ash, all worked. The hammer seems to be the only opening, but there's no testing on shrouded hammer revolvers like the Rhino or S&W 638.

>>32239994
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVtebavUTJk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6nARXb-lxY
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/maybe-its-time-we-torture-test-a-revolver.134848/#post-1646238

guess revolvers aren't popular enough to get tested

>>32237641

I can't not see the fish fetus in the logo anymore

File: gign.jpg (242KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 2000x1333px

>>32237605
Uhh...
>pic related

Also, you're right, but a revolver "malfunctioning" means catastrophic failure i.e. ruptures and cracks.
Those same malfunctions would fuck up a semi just as badly.

I considered the rhino for CC, but ended up deciding against it for one reason:

if you grab this thing wrong and go to fire, you can lose a finger easily. The cylinder gap is extremely close to your support hand when you hold this, and under stress, theres nothing stopping you from fucking your hand.

>>32240579
Miculek did a video with the Rhino, he did grab it wrong and burn his finger but that was it.

>>32241103
oh sweet I never saw this one
https://youtu.be/YbDUWACwRqk?t=506

>>32241231
I enjoyed how awkward he was with it, after using normal revolvers for 30+ years

>>32238581
No. Just no.
Recoil doesn't go away, the Rhino does nothing to mitigate recoil.
It has marginally less muzzle rise.

Learn the difference or quit posting.

>>32237641
I totally forgot about my pocket mud.

File: mZPR9Eb[1].jpg (109KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 720x960px

>>32241103
>>32240579
You think THAT'S the worst thing that will happen to you with a Rhino?

You don't want to see what happened to his finger.

>>32236394
>if you have a dud you can just pull the trigger again
but what if it's a hangfire?

>>32236296
What's wrong with .38 special?

>>32236296
>357
>extreme amounts of recoil
Compared to what, exactly? 357 is a comfy and highly effective SD round. It's the original dindu stopper.

>>32242057
Video?

>>32242083
There's a leddit thread on it, just look up "chiappa rhino explodes reddit". They have a pic of the guy's hand in there.

>>32242005
First of all, the recoil of tree fiddy seben is fucking weak to begin with.

Second, out of a babydick barrel it's even less, because half the damn powder burns outside of the barrel.

While you're right about the muzzle ride and not the actual recoil impulse in relation to the barrel, you're the retarded one my friendo.

>>32242071
Nothing, he's saying that it's a good fit for shorty revolvers.

>>32238764

That's an equally incorrect /k/ meme. Revolvers ARE more reliable.

>>32236212
P938?
P938

>>32242075
It's just 9mm in an imperial system measurement.

>>32242135
Your IQ legitimately must be around 60.
I never said anything about the recoil of the cartridge specifically. I pointed out a simple fact, one you're clearly too much of an inbred fuckup to get through your malformed retard head.

If you're too stupid to not understand the difference between recoil and muzzle rise you shouldn't be posting here.
You shouldn't be posting here.

>>32242168
Fag

What are some good calibres for super short pistol barrels?

>>32242094
Oh dear God that's insane can I link the imgur on here or no because sfw?

Every other gun can get the fuck out.

686

>>32242149
P938

Orrr maybe a shield?

>>32242186
50 big machine gun

Also is that a FAMAS?

>>32242148
>That's an equally incorrect /k/ meme. Revolvers ARE more reliable.

Those are incongruent statements and you're a jackass. What's more, I'm speaking from experience. I own 2 revolvers, how many do you own?

>>32242201
Well I knew that .357 is bad, since it can't burn all it's powder unless it has 5 inches of barrel (just like my PENIS EHEHEHE). I take it that smaller rounds are better. Going p+ (p for penis) is pointless (like a penis), because you run into the .357 problem again. I need something that makes full use of minimal barrel. I'm talking 2 inches of barrel-penis here.

9mm? Maybe with subsonic loads. I hear the .45 is already slow. Maybe I could use that. Get myself A Light Shining In Darkness.

>>32242094
>pic
jesus christ ouch

>>32242541
Speer and a few other companies have .38 short barrel loads designed exactly for that.

>>32242148
>1st guy says that revolvers are more reliable
>2nd guy says that there's no practical difference
>(you) say that saying that there's no practical difference is equally as wrong as saying that revolvers are more reliable
>implying that revolvers are less reliable

>>32236296
>Firing 357 ain't it. You get extreme amounts of recoil and hardly much more speed out of such a small barrel.

I'm not sure why this gets repeated so often when it defies common sense and the vast body of evidence available to the contrary. There are very, very good reasons to NOT use .357, but the whole "it barely has any more speed than .38 +P out of a short barrel!" thing is demonstrably untrue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27wDLjY5JSs

Chrono'd out of the same gun with the same brand and weight of ammunition, the .357 has a muzzle velocity that's 1.5x that of the 38 +P.

>>32238764
>There is no appreciable difference between revolvers and semi-autos as far as general reliability goes, what's important is that you use good ammo and maintain your firearm.

This is true when comparing duty/compact-sized semi-autos and revolvers. In fact, I would go further than that and actually say that modern semi-autos are more reliable than revolvers, especially for use in adverse conditions. I don't think there's any revolver in the world that could handle what a Mk.23 could, for example. When you get down to pocket gun size though? Many of the common semi-auto choices of that size regularly have problems, even after the standard 200 round break-in period. For instance:

*The Sig Mustangs have an extremely weak guide-rod, recoil springs that require replacement after less than 1k rounds, and an extractor that's prone to breakage.

*The Glock 42 is very picky about ammo and has a slide that's prone to prematurely locking open. Can't speak for the 43 as I've not tried it.

*The Beretta Pico has a fragile firing pin will break if you dry-fire it and, in some cases, has actually broken on normal use.

*The M&P Shield is prone to having extraction issues.

*Kahr slides have a habit of chewing up their rails on the non-premium models.

The common revolver choices of the same general size (J-frame, LCR, SP-101) have none of these kinds of semi-regular problems.