NEA Problems

Have you had problems with your NEA?

  • I had an NEA and it never had any problems

    Votes: 149 34.7%

  • I had an NEA and it had minor problems

    Votes: 80 18.6%

  • I had an NEA and it had major problems

    Votes: 94 21.9%

  • My buddy had/I know someone with an NEA and it had problems

    Votes: 106 24.7%
  • Total voters
    429
Where there is smoke there is fire....

Sure they will get better... But in my experience, they leave something to be desired.
They are not the best budget AR..

I have spoken to the owner of NEA, and they are improving....

Would I buy another? No.

Not unless they really up,their game.
 
Runningfool said:
The first rifles they produced were in November 2011, a little more than 4 years ago. You stating that they've had issues with their rifle manufacturing from 2008-2014 is bad info because sure enough, just as you are doing now, someone a few months from now is going to say, "NEA has been making AR-15s for 8 years now and they still haven't got it right!"
Click to expand...

Sure, okay. 2011 is when they first started selling rifles. If they founded their business with the intention of producing AR15s in 2008, I and any reasonable individual would come to the conclusion that they started making and testing AR15s in 2008. If you want to keep dodging the question we can argue semantics all day long.

The point is, there have been quality control issues with their rifles manufactured up until 2014 at least. Yes or no?
 
Sigh. NEA was making parts for other firearms in 2008...shotguns, Swiss arms, I'm not sure what others. They didn't start making and selling AR15 rifles until 2011. If you don't believe me ask around.

Anyhow, I'm done with this thread. It's a shame that just when I think NEA can be discussed here, good and bad, it deteriorates into this kind of mess.

If anyone who has posted in this thread, or even reading this thread for that matter, would like to see and use any one of my 3 NEA rifles I'd be happy to meet up at your range or mine and let you judge them for themselves. I have an early version (January 2012) 14.5" with 11,000+ rounds through it, a 7.5" from 2014 with maybe 8-900 rounds through it, and an 18" I bought in September 2015 that has about 1000 rounds through it so far. You can see for yourself how NEA has progressed over the past 4 years.
 
Last edited:
Runningfool said:
Anyhow, I'm done with this thread. It's a shame that just when I think NEA can be discussed here, good and bad, it deteriorates into this kind of mess.

If anyone who has posted in this thread, or even reading this thread for that matter, would like to see and use any one of my 3 NEA rifles I'd be happy to meet up at your range or mine and let you judge them for themselves. I have an early version (January 2011) 14.5" with 11,000+ rounds through it, a 7.5" from 2014 with maybe 8-900 rounds through it, and an 18" I bought in September 2015 that has about 1000 rounds through it so far. You can see for yourself how NEA has progressed over the past 4 years.
Click to expand...

Really, it is a shame that you won't answer a simple question.

By the way, how do you have an NEA rifle from January 2011 if, as you just claimed, they didn't start producing them until November 2011?
 
800-900 rounds trough a rifle lol please, I can shoot that in an afternoon. This doesn't prove anything. Nobody care about your 11,000 rounds anyways, what I care is that some people shot 5 rounds and their bolt shattered in half.
 
Grapeshot said:
1. It's pretty clear that overpressure wasn't the cause of the failure in the first video. When rounds go kaboom in an AR, they don't just surgically take out the barrel extension and cam pin. In fact they're more likely to take out literally everything around the barrel extension and cam pin instead. But hey, don't take my word for it, you can compare yourself. Look at the results of an actual overpressure round in another NEA rifle that blew up at the factory. The differences are pretty obvious. The threads are linked earlier in this one, but you can check them out here:
Click to expand...

I'm not pretending I know the cause of the failure, and I'm not insisting an overpressure round was the cause, but I have to address the above...

Are you serious???? Dude, an overpressure round can cause you a little gas in the face, or blow a good portion of a firearm to bits. There are degrees...a little spike and maybe you pop a primer, a little bigger and maybe things start moving faster than they should, causing a part to fail, and maybe a few others with it. Finally you can get pressures that cause the firearm to come apart completely, like from an obstructed bore, or the case head failing. I just want to make sure I understand this...AR's don't fail by degrees, and the proof is you tube videos?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't assume to be an expert (the ass in assume etc etc..) but wouldn't a blown primer on the cartridge case clearly point to over pressure? When I mean clearly I mean, would'nt a blown primer point ONLY to over pressure?
 
OldFrankHog said:
I wouldn't assume to be an expert (the ass in assume etc etc..) but wouldn't a blown primer on the cartridge case clearly point to over pressure? When I mean clearly I mean, would'nt a blown primer point ONLY to over pressure?
Click to expand...

It could be, BUT, let's assume it was excessive pressure that popped that primer. It could be the ammo, it could be how the ammo had been handled, it could be a defect in the chamber/barrel. Also, however that chunk came out of the primerless case could be responsible for the primer falling out. In the end parts broke, it could have been a defect with the rifle, the ammo, or the man. If you put on your thinking cap, a picture and the brief description of the event doesn't give us enough information to reach a conclusion. To state it broke because it was NEA, in a nut shell what some are asserting, is so foolish it irritates me to the point of feeling forced to inject a little criticism.
 
redshooter said:
AR's don't fail by degrees, and the proof is you tube videos?
Click to expand...

Nope, that is basically the complete opposite of my position there. I'm not going to belittle you or immediately accuse you of poor reading comprehension like some would here, but here's a better explanation of the statement I made.

The YouTube video the other forum member posted documenting the damage, as well as the photos he posted in the other thread, in addition to his description of the events as they occurred led me to suspect it was not overpressure, and the NEA factory kaboom was just further evidence of it. I think it's reasonable to come to this conclusion based on the evidence at hand, but feel free to provide an alternate explanation based on the evidence we have.

I'm saying that when there is a scenario, be it overpressure or anything else, there is a likely chain of progression of observable damage that usually starts with the weakest link first. There is definitely a range of severity based on the severity of the overpressure.

The problem with comparing what happened two weeks ago to any overpressure scenario is that it doesn't look even remotely similar in terms of the damage.

If you compare two:

The NEA factory kaboom had:

-a severely deformed bolt carrier
-a severely deformed and cracked upper
-a severely deformed lower
-a blown out extractor
-a blown out magazine
-no barrel extension failure
-(unknown if the cam pin or charging handle broke)

The failure two weeks ago had:

-a broken cam pin
-a broken barrel extension
-a broken charging handle latch
-some chipping of the bolt carrier near where the cam pin inserts
-no visible or reported damage to the upper, lower, extractor, or magazine

Let's just assume both events were caused by overpressure for a moment. If the first case had higher pressure and therefore more severe damage, then you would expect to see the damage caused by the lower pressure failure, on top of the damage caused by the higher pressure failure. We don't see this here. You can switch up and assume the second case was a worse overpressure, but you'd expect to see the same effects of the first failure compounded with the second.

You have two documented failures in front of you that share almost no similarities in terms of observable damage. Therefore it's reasonable to conclude that they had different causes. Does that make sense to you?
 
OldFrankHog said:
I wouldn't assume to be an expert (the ass in assume etc etc..) but wouldn't a blown primer on the cartridge case clearly point to over pressure? When I mean clearly I mean, would'nt a blown primer point ONLY to over pressure?
Click to expand...

No. A blown primer can also be caused by poor headspacing, poor bolt lockup, and probably a few other things.
 
Mine is flawless and works with every corrosive and non-corrosive ammo that I could find
and is pretty accurate with the 4X Primary Arms red dot scope and fun to shoot.
It got the nickname Fire Dragon... ;)

12654478_10156564527905093_753443689102650156_n.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]

 
Yes, Thewhole9yards, the Romanian surplus was my first choice
because I was born in Romania a long time ago.
I have couple more crates that I got from LeBaron when these were $198.
The XCR loves these as well.
Robert
 
I bought my 14.5 almost two years ago. No problems here. I don't shoot it a lot (rarely more than 100 rounds per session), but it's been flawless so far. I have added a Timney trigger, the latest NEA nickel bolt & a BCM charging handle.
Anecdotes, anecdotes, anecdotes...

I have some background in statistical analysis. I've designed studies, collected data, and analyzed it. The above poll is minimally informative, but no more. So many variables possible...
Nevertheless, as a prospective buyer it would make me apprehensive too. Of course it would. However, what is obvious to me is that this apprehension may IN FACT be unwarranted. Or maybe it is.

When I bought my gun, I was very aware of the poor reviews. It appeared that the problems happened with the early guns. The Kiwis seem to like them, especially the newer Gens. So, I took a chance, so to speak. And I confess that I had two other reasons for buying an NEA:
1) I think every Canadian firearms owner should buy an AR - strength in numbers
2) I strongly believe in buying Canadian - I want to support this industry in our country, and to help fledgeling gunmakers get off the ground

My 2 cents...my bias.
 
Last edited:
I have an NEA15 PDW 7.5" Barrel with CCS stock which I purchased a few years ago.

After the first year of use (approximately 250 rounds) I took it out to the range and the action would not cycle, I had to cycle it by hand by racking the charging handle round by round. Took it home and cleaned it, only to discover the gas block had come loose as the setscrew had backed off.

Since that time it has worked without issue until this past weekend, where upon the first round with the stock fully extended, the recoil caused the stock to collapse completely. This pinched my neck skin between the buffer tube and butt of the stock and hung from there for about 15 seconds as I fumbled with my non dominant hand to depress the stock release button. I have looked the stock over and could only deduce the push button which provides the positive lock of the stock by fitting into its notches, has worn enough to allow the stock to collapse with insubstantial force. This can be seen in a video I took and posted.

I love this rifle, but these two issues are putting that love into question. Hopefully it's a simple fix and won't reoccur.
 
Goosetaf said:
I have an NEA15 PDW 7.5" Barrel with CCS stock which I purchased a few years ago.

After the first year of use (approximately 250 rounds) I took it out to the range and the action would not cycle, I had to cycle it by hand by racking the charging handle round by round. Took it home and cleaned it, only to discover the gas block had come loose as the setscrew had backed off.

Since that time it has worked without issue until this past weekend, where upon the first round with the stock fully extended, the recoil caused the stock to collapse completely. This pinched my neck skin between the buffer tube and butt of the stock and hung from there for about 15 seconds as I fumbled with my non dominant hand to depress the stock release button. I have looked the stock over and could only deduce the push button which provides the positive lock of the stock by fitting into its notches, has worn enough to allow the stock to collapse with insubstantial force. This can be seen in a video I took and posted.

I love this rifle, but these two issues are putting that love into question. Hopefully it's a simple fix and won't reoccur.
Click to expand...

Glad you are ok, what is the round count on that POS?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom