The NEA rifles...who else is in the "Seen 'em" club?
- Thread starter misanthropist
- Start date
If they are as you note, nearly the same how can the BLK be better than the Whisper?
What "problems" did the Whisper have that the BLK solved? The only issue was that as a wildcat there was no standardized version. The other "problems" with the Whisper are total BS dreamed up by Robert Silvers in an attempt to make himself look smarter than he really is.
The truth is the BLK is virtually identical to the Whisper except in some very minor ways. The BLK is simply a SAAMI standardized Whisper.
Neither is a better choice over the other cause they are essentially the same round.
Personally I'd choose the Whisper because it is in no way attached to those shysters at AAC. But that is just a personal thing. Having said that I hate to admit that we actually have a 300 BLK reamer.
So the next gun I build will in reality be a 300 BLK but I will be engraving 300 Whisper on the side of the barrel. Actually I think I will call it a 300 SPEX cause if AAC can coopt an existing cartridge and call it their own why can't I?
The 300 Whisper and 300/221 Fireball have a shorter throat which causes problems with using 223/5.56 brass due to the variation in brass thickness. I don't know about you but, I like being able to make casing out of 5.56 vs 221 Fireball as 5.56 is plentiful. Plus, there is a lot of factory BLK brass made already as it is not a wildcat anymore. And, like I said I wasnt trying to start a fight. I dont know you from a whole in the ground and had no idea of your knowledge level. I was simply trying to help out in case you didnt know about the BLK as it is fairly new and the newest step in the ladder.
Last edited:
And yes, in my opinion, the BLK is a better choice for the reasons I stated and the reasons you stated yourself. Its SAAMI standardized and therefore there will be more components and tools available at cheaper prices. You said yourself your using a BLK reamer. But, to each their own. Sorry for trying to be helpful.
Last edited:
North Eastern Arms
Manufacturer-Business Member
Since this is veering off course; http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=627759
now everyone has seen
now everyone has seen
Yeah, I was wondering that too. Are they chambered in 5.56 or 223?
North Eastern Arms
Manufacturer-Business Member
5.56
Sorry, one last kick at the cat and then I will leave it alone.
And hence a lesson on not believing everything you read on the internets. I have two 300-221 rifles and they run chopped down 223 sourced cases no problem.
Brass is super easy to make either from 221 Fireball or cut down 223. 300 BLK is not any kind of step, it is nothing more than a marketing excercise so somone can make money from other people's hard work.
Except that 300 BLK is virtually identical to 300 Whisper and thus all the components and tools used in one can be used in the other. Thus neither is better than the other because they are the same and everything is interchangeable.
As an example my rifles are both 300-221 but my die set is an original SSK 300 Whisper. Yet they all get along just fine. I expect the next version in 300 BLK to also work with everything that I have.
All you are doing is buying in to the hype and marketing and believing the BS. 300 Whisper has been around for more than 25 years and the case itself hasn't changed appreciably in all that time.
K, I am done, back to the uber cool NEA rifle talk. Sorry.
And hence a lesson on not believing everything you read on the internets. I have two 300-221 rifles and they run chopped down 223 sourced cases no problem.
Brass is super easy to make either from 221 Fireball or cut down 223. 300 BLK is not any kind of step, it is nothing more than a marketing excercise so somone can make money from other people's hard work.
Except that 300 BLK is virtually identical to 300 Whisper and thus all the components and tools used in one can be used in the other. Thus neither is better than the other because they are the same and everything is interchangeable.
As an example my rifles are both 300-221 but my die set is an original SSK 300 Whisper. Yet they all get along just fine. I expect the next version in 300 BLK to also work with everything that I have.
All you are doing is buying in to the hype and marketing and believing the BS. 300 Whisper has been around for more than 25 years and the case itself hasn't changed appreciably in all that time.
K, I am done, back to the uber cool NEA rifle talk. Sorry.
Sorry, one last kick at the cat and then I will leave it alone.
And hence a lesson on not believing everything you read on the internets. I have two 300-221 rifles and they run chopped down 223 sourced cases no problem.
Brass is super easy to make either from 221 Fireball or cut down 223. 300 BLK is not any kind of step, it is nothing more than a marketing excercise so somone can make money from other people's hard work.
Except that 300 BLK is virtually identical to 300 Whisper and thus all the components and tools used in one can be used in the other. Thus neither is better than the other because they are the same and everything is interchangeable.
As an example my rifles are both 300-221 but my die set is an original SSK 300 Whisper. Yet they all get along just fine. I expect the next version in 300 BLK to also work with everything that I have.
All you are doing is buying in to the hype and marketing and believing the BS. 300 Whisper has been around for more than 25 years and the case itself hasn't changed appreciably in all that time.
K, I am done, back to the uber cool NEA rifle talk. Sorry.
I read it in this months issue of Special Weapons magazine actually. And, as I said, I was just trying to help in case you had'nt heard about the BLK. So, go ahead and build your rifle in whatever chambering you want and I will do the same. As usual, just trying to be helpful and some douche has to start a fight. Typical forum bull s**t.
There is no real downside to using 6061 over 7075 in this application. Being made from 6061 billet is plenty strong enough.
Also, 7075 is about 3 times the price of 6061 without 3 times the benefit.
You are 100% correct about 7075 being much more expensive to buy than 6061... not so sure about your claim that there is no real downside to using 6061.
It is my understanding that 7075 is about 3 times stronger than 7075 (another reason it's cheaper to use 6061 since it will cut faster and faster is cheaper)... but the industry standard is 7075 and the Milspec stipulates 7075 as well. There is more to "milspec" than just drilling the holes in the right place... it sets standards for tolerances, materials, material treatments, testing protocols, etc..
In the end when you reduce the quality of materials you reduce the quality of the end product. I'm not saying for a minute that the proposed NEA rifle isn't a great gun at a great price.... in fact I think it is. What I am saying is that if you use lower quality materials (6061 for example) to achieve lower pricing, you can't at the same time claim to be of the same quality and spec as companies that conform to the higher standards. I make that statement because NEA specifically stated:
"other then the price tag and lack of a free float quad rail..... we are pretty much in line with LMT. (post #10 made 6-18-2011)
The truth is the product is nothing like what LMT produces... not in materials, treatments, specifications or testing protocols. LMT produces Military Grade firearms... NEA is producing a "military style" firearm. There is a huge difference and it goes way beyond just their choice to use 6061 for their receivers.
Again, I am NOT knocking NEA in any way... I think they've done a good thing and I'm glad to see a Canadian company producing firearms here in Canada... I have no doubt they will sell very well and in fact I think they are a great answer to the Norinco M4.
"Just as good as" doesn't mean the same as... and often proves to be untrue.
Mark
- Location
- Fraser Valley BC
You are 100% correct about 7075 being much more expensive to buy than 6061... not so sure about your claim that there is no real downside to using 6061.
It is my understanding that 7075 is about 3 times stronger than 7075 (another reason it's cheaper to use 6061 since it will cut faster and faster is cheaper)... but the industry standard is 7075 and the Milspec stipulates 7075 as well. There is more to "milspec" than just drilling the holes in the right place... it sets standards for tolerances, materials, material treatments, testing protocols, etc..
In the end when you reduce the quality of materials you reduce the quality of the end product. I'm not saying for a minute that the proposed NEA rifle isn't a great gun at a great price.... in fact I think it is. What I am saying is that if you use lower quality materials (6061 for example) to achieve lower pricing, you can't at the same time claim to be of the same quality and spec as companies that conform to the higher standards. I make that statement because NEA specifically stated:
"other then the price tag and lack of a free float quad rail..... we are pretty much in line with LMT. (post #10 made 6-18-2011)
The truth is the product is nothing like what LMT produces... not in materials, treatments, specifications or testing protocols. LMT produces Military Grade firearms... NEA is producing a "military style" firearm. There is a huge difference and it goes way beyond just their choice to use 6061 for their receivers.
Again, I am NOT knocking NEA in any way... I think they've done a good thing and I'm glad to see a Canadian company producing firearms here in Canada... I have no doubt they will sell very well and in fact I think they are a great answer to the Norinco M4.
"Just as good as" doesn't mean the same as... and often proves to be untrue.
Mark
Interesting and informative post.
Definitely interesting...I don't have sufficient knowledge of NEA's testing, treatments, or materials to dispute this at this time. I would be interested to hear NEA's take on this.
