Today was warm and calm. Perfect for testing the new NEA 14.5” carbine.
I shot several different handloads and factory loadings off sandbags at 100 yards. The NEA was topped with a 20X target scope. My Norinco M4 has a Millet 1.5 – 4 scope I use for CQB.
I had some misgivings about using the low powered Millet scope for accuracy work, but as it turned out, results were good. The Millet has a small round reticle which perfectly surrounded the big black aiming mark. It was like shooting target rifle with irons.
The target set up used black patches as aiming marks. The 20X scope was easy to aim at one corner of the patch.
For factory ammo I tried some IVI military ball and some 30 year old Norinco yellow box 55 FMJ. My handloads were some old 69g MatchKing and 80 g MatchKing left over from my Target Rifle days. I also shot some new handloads made with 55gr FMJ and a moderate load of H335. My standard CQB ammo for ARs other than my Norinco.
The NEA ran perfectly. Every round went bang and extracted and ejected. The trigger is typical new AR. A bit gritty. A tad lighter than any other AR I recall. When I ran a similar test a few months ago, the Daniel Defense trigger was so bad I could not shoot accurately. My Norinco M4 has a Rock River trigger that breaks cleanly at 3.5 pounds. Sweet!
Here are the results. The two rifles shot similar groups. Both shot the IVI well, with the NEA a bit better. Neither liked the Norinco Yellow Box. Both shot vertical groups with the 80 MatchKing, and both loved the Sierra 69g Match Kings.
My Norinco has two important modifications to consider. It has a floated barrel. (A tube forend.) The NEA comes with a floated barrel, standard. Until this shoot I have always been disappointed in the Norinco 100 groups. But I was always testing 55 FMJ bullets. I knew match bullet would do better, but I am surprised at how much better they do. The two groups with the Sierra 69 Matchkings were under 1 ¼”. I think that is remarkable for factory AR15.
The NEA is an impressive rifle, considering it costs about $500 less than the rifles one would compare it to. Like the Daniel Defense, the only mod I would make is a Rock River trigger.
I am not qualified to compare construction quality and materials. The NEA has many little differences and details from other ARs, and I like them. Next week the new 10.5" arrives, and I look forward to testing it. I will get a better selection of factory ammo and make up more match loads with 69 Match Kings.
One thing I want to find out is how the rifle compare shooting offhand. The NEA has a heavier barrel and I suspect that it will be more stable from the standing position than the lighter Norinco. And I expect to find that the 14.5 does better than the 10.5, for the same reason.
I shot several different handloads and factory loadings off sandbags at 100 yards. The NEA was topped with a 20X target scope. My Norinco M4 has a Millet 1.5 – 4 scope I use for CQB.
I had some misgivings about using the low powered Millet scope for accuracy work, but as it turned out, results were good. The Millet has a small round reticle which perfectly surrounded the big black aiming mark. It was like shooting target rifle with irons.
The target set up used black patches as aiming marks. The 20X scope was easy to aim at one corner of the patch.
For factory ammo I tried some IVI military ball and some 30 year old Norinco yellow box 55 FMJ. My handloads were some old 69g MatchKing and 80 g MatchKing left over from my Target Rifle days. I also shot some new handloads made with 55gr FMJ and a moderate load of H335. My standard CQB ammo for ARs other than my Norinco.
The NEA ran perfectly. Every round went bang and extracted and ejected. The trigger is typical new AR. A bit gritty. A tad lighter than any other AR I recall. When I ran a similar test a few months ago, the Daniel Defense trigger was so bad I could not shoot accurately. My Norinco M4 has a Rock River trigger that breaks cleanly at 3.5 pounds. Sweet!
Here are the results. The two rifles shot similar groups. Both shot the IVI well, with the NEA a bit better. Neither liked the Norinco Yellow Box. Both shot vertical groups with the 80 MatchKing, and both loved the Sierra 69g Match Kings.
My Norinco has two important modifications to consider. It has a floated barrel. (A tube forend.) The NEA comes with a floated barrel, standard. Until this shoot I have always been disappointed in the Norinco 100 groups. But I was always testing 55 FMJ bullets. I knew match bullet would do better, but I am surprised at how much better they do. The two groups with the Sierra 69 Matchkings were under 1 ¼”. I think that is remarkable for factory AR15.
The NEA is an impressive rifle, considering it costs about $500 less than the rifles one would compare it to. Like the Daniel Defense, the only mod I would make is a Rock River trigger.
I am not qualified to compare construction quality and materials. The NEA has many little differences and details from other ARs, and I like them. Next week the new 10.5" arrives, and I look forward to testing it. I will get a better selection of factory ammo and make up more match loads with 69 Match Kings.
One thing I want to find out is how the rifle compare shooting offhand. The NEA has a heavier barrel and I suspect that it will be more stable from the standing position than the lighter Norinco. And I expect to find that the 14.5 does better than the 10.5, for the same reason.
Last edited:
