UPDATED with range PICS NEA vs Norq review/testing

easysauce said:
and if your going to call me a liar, at least READ THE DAMN REVIEW properly, there is a 7" difference between a 14.5 barrel and a 7.5, and the NEA did 1" better... not 2",
Click to expand...

My bad, for some reason I thought you had said 10"... oh well 7.5" barrel and 2.5 inches from bullseye is phenominal for 100 meters using a 3MOA optic.
and its distance from bulls eye, not groups. and its 100 m, not yards. and it was supported by the magazine, which is more then I usually get in competition. I want this gun to work in that environment, not some theoretical, gun viced, environment.
Click to expand...


For the record 100m =~110 yards... so thats even more impressive.

My appologies, I misunderstood... when I read :
both rifles were shot from prone to 100m for tighest group(10shots) for accuracy, and the groups are in inches from the bulls eye
Click to expand...


and

the norq: seems like 5" to 6" groups were the norm, had two on top of each other less then an inch away for one target, but it took me longer to get these shots off as well.
Click to expand...

and

the NEA: my best group, prone, with magazing as the rest, was 2.5" (has to be luck though, was first one, couldnt do it again today) rest were 3-4",

the Norq: best group was 4", rest were 4-5"
Click to expand...

I just assumed since you constantly repeate the word "groups" that you were in fact refering to groups. I have to be honest, I have never heard of the bullet closest to the bullseye in inches being refered to as the rifles grouping... usually it is the distance among several shots when compared to each other. Although... your own results seem to contradict each other paragraph to paragraph...


if someone had a gun vice, and a remote trigger, to properly take the human factor out of the shooting, then of course I would use it... but do you have both those items?
Click to expand...
I have a vice.

Not saying you had to use one, but at least sand bag it if you are going to make the claim that the NEA 7.5" PDW is more accurate at 100m than a 14" Norinco LOL

and yes, the NEA does have a free floated rail, your version of PROPER free floating is just a barrel hovering in mid air with no connection to the receiver then?
Click to expand...

You specifically said, Free Floated BARREL. YES A FREE FLOATED BARREL ONLY HAS CONTACT WITH THE RECIEVER, THATS WHY IT IS A FREE FLOATED BARREL.

give me a break... its a free floated rail, saying otherwise is just wrong,
Click to expand...
....yes... thats why I corrected you.

the rail makes no contact with the barrel, hence free floated, sure the gas block is there, because it has to be, but your support hand is not directly influencing the barrel, and that is the point, OBVIOUSLY its not floated in the same way as a bolt action since you need the DI system to work, but it is still a free float system. go lawyer up and sue NEA, because free floated rail is right there on the specs.
Click to expand...

You seem to confuse Barrel and Handguard/Rail... actually you don't seem to understand this aspect at all.

For the record, NEA claims it is a FREE FLOAT RAIL, your rifle does in fact have a FREE FLOAT RAIL. NEA does not claim that it is a FREE FLOAT BARREL, your rifle does not have a FREE FLOAT BARREL... so I don't feel the need to sue NEA for somthing they never claimed.


why are you holding me to a professional gun testers standards? I wish I had a nice rest, and the choice of throwing a sub MOA optik on there, are you gonna lend me one instead of complaining? or is that too helpfull?
Click to expand...

I am not holding you to professional standards; However the more I read your posts I am starting to realize that you don't understand what your talking about.

you completely ignore the lack of staking and FTF;s the norq had as well,
Click to expand...

I didn't notice you mention the Norc improperly staked? As for the FTF, based on your FFB and Groupings, I have to wonder what your definition is of a FTF.


and even when NEA stakes properly you ##### about staking
Click to expand...

This again... where did I say NEA didn't stake correctly?????

I am not trying to troll you here, but you keep posting back with these long winded attacks on me that are all over the place and putting words in my mouth. I said you sound like a fanboy because your acting like one. Your putting words in my mouth, attacking statements I didn't make, all in the attempt to unblemish and protect the NEA reputation I didn't soil...
 
Max Owner said:
Sounds like the early ones are having problems. And the later ones are getting better.

Just posted in another thread that new products need time to get the bugs worked out.
Click to expand...

But shouldn't the bugs be worked out in the factory?

Same thing happened with their earlier 858 rails, the first few gens were faulty, and i'm stuck with one.

We are being used as product testers. Anyone buying a first gen anything from these guys is a fool. I was a fool.
 
I got a NEA15 CQB and I can't complain, sure it had minor issues I'm not gonna deny it, but those issues were fixed in under 10 mins. Now its rocking FAB Defense kool-aid and I just love it. It looks good annd it work as good as it looks! ;P

_MG_0248NEA-15.JPG
 
kouik said:
I got a NEA15 CQB and I can't complain, sure it had minor issues I'm not gonna deny it, but those issues were fixed in under 10 mins. Now its rocking FAB Defense kool-aid and I just love it. It looks good annd it work as good as it looks! ;P

_MG_0248NEA-15.JPG
Click to expand...

Nice looking gun.

I think you should refinish the gun in OD green, would look dope. Im personally not a fan of the FAB stock, I prefer the magpul coolaid, however the grip is fantastic product, and I like that foregrip.

well where NEA is using new finishes and metal treatments on their guns... what about new color options? I would buy one pre painted in FG!
 
sorry, i did say barrel in the review, I meant rail, my bad,

contract, you keep calling me out as a fanboy, nut dangler, sandbagging, ect, so im not sure what reaction you expected when you start the race with derogitory comments like that,

anyways, lesson learned, next time I review something Ill just get someone with a hd camera to film the shots and groups, I think video will do a better job explaining things then I could.

next few weeks ill see if I can get video and hopefuly a rest
 
Here's a group for you Easysauce.. I know its not off a bench like some want, so they'll have to forgive the 25m targetry. That and the test rifle with about 10k rounds and built from factory seconds.

[youtube]v6LCNfmEYwc[/youtube]
 
North Eastern Arms said:
Here's a group for you Easysauce.. I know its not off a bench like some want, so they'll have to forgive the 25m targetry. That and the test rifle with about 10k rounds and built from factory seconds.

[youtube]v6LCNfmEYwc[/youtube]
Click to expand...

... he shot 2.5" groups with your 7.5" pdw, I don't think he needs a bench :)

I do apologize to the op for calling him a nut swinger and a fanboy, your right that was not nice. I am glad he likes his rifle.
 
c0ntract said:
... he shot 2.5" groups with your 7.5" pdw, I don't think he needs a bench :)

I do apologize to the op for calling him a nut swinger and a fanboy, your right that was not nice. I am glad he likes his rifle.
Click to expand...

2.5" from bulls eye, I just took the distance from bulls eye to the farthest hole, IE 2.5 is the radius from bulls eye to farthest bullet hole,

my line of thinking on it is that I dont care if all bullets hit the same hole, if they miss what im shooting at, so even if all bullets are in the same hole, but that hole is 5" from bulls eye, I call that a 5" "group", correct or not, thats just what made sense to me.

lesson learned:
I should spend some ammo money on a good camera, would likely make things make much more sense.
 
That is not correct...what you are describing is just whether the gun is zeroed or not.

If the bullets all go in the same hole, a foot low and a foot right, the gun is extremely precise, but the zero is totally off and you should zero your rifle.

If the bullets go in random holes spread six inches around the X, the gun is much, much less precise, but it's zeroed correctly.
 
I'm finally getting out tomorrow for an extended range day with the NEA. Will have vids, impressions etc. sometime over the weekend.
 
Claven2 said:
120-150 rounds per minute for the F/A Norinco? That's actually really terrible. A proper M16 variant should be able to do 700-950 rounds per minute depending on ammo and buffer weight.

NORINCO SUXX!
Click to expand...

if you bothered to read below, it shows the "theoritical" fire rate...the one you mention is its "battle fire rate"
 
Max Owner said:
People always feel the need to whine and complain.
Click to expand...

haha funny you say that I was just gonna do this update* I ended up feeling my trigger was too heavy, I contacted NEA and had a no hassle replacement drop in group in my mail box less then a week later, two pins later I have a much lighter trigger.

now if only smith and wesson cared about the ghastly trigger they put in my m and p...

luckily the replacement from brownells is 5$ less then the 100$ limit

not that anyone cares about my m and p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom