I would love to agree with you, but the Rhino just doesn't have a stellar service record. Again, the DS revolver is VERY aesthetically appealing, but it suffers heavily from obnoxious complexity, and overall fragility. This isn't as much of an opinion, as a statement of fact. Trust me, if you own one, they will appreciate in value like fucking crazy, but as a daily-carry/target/competition revolver I just can't recommend it.
the Chiappa Rhino was never intended to be a service revolver, and on top of that, has not had any meaningful field tests. it is a target revolver, and it isn't as complex as you seem to think it is. the typical DS has a bit over 70 parts. a comparable S&W Model 10 (as a representative K-frame) has about 60-odd. the variance will be the sights (target or accro), and the Rhino's cocking lever, cocking indicator, and the return spring for the cocking lever. the connecting rod and interlock lever are lifted mechanically from the Model 19 nearly - replace the rebound slide/spring/lever assembly with the connector assembly and the trigger rod with the connecting rod/lever.
it
is your opinion, because you can directly point at the parts list and design and directly see that the Rhino is a modified hammer-fired S&W with a few embellishments. this is not out of line for Ghisoni's earlier work (i can compare both the Rhino and the Unica 6 for example as a much more complex revolver).
it is an aluminum framed revolver, with the rest largely being stamped steel. just like the S&W Airweights (Model 642) and the scandium-framed 340, they can certainly handle a moderate diet of .357 Magnum loads, but not on the duty cycle of a fully steel constructed revolver. they aren't a GP100. your opinion is duly noted, but people can and do carry aluminum revolvers and the Rhino is capable, if not popular, for the task.
Oh, I'm aware that 1911s (and variants) are no longer the dominant sidearm issued and while a soldier may choose the Glock-19 (for weight/size) or the Baretta M9 (for availability/accuracy); the 1911 platform isn't rejected for reliability issues and it still seems to finds it's place on the modern battlefield. The last 30 years may be considered "limited service", but the 1911 has been serving armed forces for 108 years all-the-same.
the 1911A1's in service were always a mix-master parts bin of random luck, often having to scavenge parts from COTS supplies in order to assemble working pistols. DoD hadn't ordered any new ones since the end of WW2 and even by Vietnam they were long in the tooth.
i spent years servicing them and the four biggest problems are inherent to the design:
- controlled feeding at all times - if you lack three points of contact you will get a misfeed
- ejection pattern will greatly depend on ramp geometry. not a problem on most issue weapons, but aftermarket ramped barrels or frames can interfere with this if someone doesn't know how to machine things properly. this will be evident with FTE's about half the time too.
- frame and slide cracking. this isn't a quality control issue - the frame itself does not have a duty cycled longer than about 10k rounds before you really need to determine if the frame has enough ductility to be rebuilt or if it's stretched too much that the heat treating on the dust cover or at the nose of the slide will crack and present a safety issue.
- while it's been a great service pistol, on the commercial market they can be very hit or miss outside of a few manufacturers that know what they're doing. that's not a knock on the design, but more that it's a design that does not lend itself well to mass manufacture outside of tightly controlled machining operations done with tooling purpose built for the task and not generic mills or lathes.
the crown for a more widespread pistol with a more modern design would be the Hi-Power. attempts at improving the 1911 just aren't worth it vs newer designs (P6 derivatives, Glock 17 derivatives, et c).
...and the 1911 has never been seen as a reliability problem.
read Sweeney's
1911: The First Hundred Years and you'll find plenty of problems with the 1911 throughout it's history and when it was eventually replaced. it was among the best handguns made, but it isn't the best anymore, and more to it, the design is both dated and can't be implemented outside of some precision shops these days, making it's life as a general purpose duty pistol effectively obsolete.
