6061: further thoughts and new information

[jcoulson64]

When did NEA say they built the best rifle in the world?

What we have is a company who built a Canadian AR15 under $1k, they've never claimed it to be anything more than that.

Exactly. You guys need to lay off.

All I know is every product Ive received that is made by NEA has been excellent quality with impeccable customer service. I don't get why everyone gets such a hard-on to ride NEA's case about every little thing.

 

[misanthropist]

I don't disagree with this line of thinking.

But I can tell you that as a consumer, here is what I want to know:

Is the NEA AR-15 a rifle built to compete with DD, LMT, BCM, etc?

Or is it built to compete with Bushmaster, Armalite, and Rock River Arms?

There is one way to know: get the answers to all the usual questions. It's fine to say, "hey, come on, this thing is a smoking deal". Well, sure, that's true. But forget money...I want to assess the gun, not in terms of "is this a good gun for the money" but in terms of "how good is this gun?"

When I get my hands on one, I will thoroughly evaluate it. But part of that evaluation is comparing it to the industry standards. Companies that refuse to give sufficient information to compare it to the standard WILL be penalized in the court of public opinion. That is the way the AR market works now.

Everyone knows that I am a vocal supporter of NEA. But in return for that support I demand quality. I don't support NEA because I think they're cool people or because I like griffins or even because they're Canadian. I support them because I primarily shoot a 58, and I've had to modernize it to stay competitive, and I have learned that the NEA parts that I have bought have outperformed others. So I support them because they have built quality parts.

But I also expect them to continue to do this, and to provide sufficient information that this can be determined without me having to buy 50 guns and run 25,000 rounds apiece through them.

The evolution of the AR market has resulted in it being very easy to know what quality looks like. It looks like correct materials, it looks like A-list small parts, it looks like in-spec rails, it looks like good machining quality, it looks like proper assembly.

But most of us don't have a lab on hand. I won't be able to test the steel and say, yep, this is Ordnance-grade 4150. I can't pop open the BCG and say, "ah, yes, this was proofed to spec".

Very few people have these kind of resources. We are forced to rely on the manufacturer to say things like, "We are using 11595-E barrel blanks. Our LPKs are from FN, and our BCGs are from Colt" (just to pick A-list manufacturers at random here).

I recognize that on CGN, many people are not used to this level of investigation. But that is the league the big dogs play in.

I have been told by people at NEA that they intend to compete with the big dogs. That is awesome and I think they can and I think they will.

But you cannot play beer league hockey in the NHL. Part of playing in the big leagues is facing this level of scrutiny. MWL is as cuddly as a porcupine with rabies but he is right: any company this vague on LF or M4C or SOCNET would get kicked to the curb and that is the brutal reality. The consumer should not have to "prove" a rifle. They should be able to assess it to a reasonable degree of certainty simply by examining the processes and components that went in to the gun.

That is part of the advantage of building clones of the 6920. You can just say, "we did everything the same. All the boxes are checked. Buy with confidence" and that will be good enough.

But if you want to do things differently, and compete with the big dogs, you should expect a metric ####ton of scrutiny and if you don't like it, well, that's just too bad because that is the market you're in.

I am behind this project 100%. But the communication has been poor and I think this is because NEA does not understand the revolution that has occurred in the AR buyers' market. They do not realize that it is now NORMAL for people to demand this much information about a new gun. It is NORMAL to ask who is using them. It is NORMAL to ask what all the components are made from.

And I would invite anyone who disagrees to hit up one of the three forums I mentioned, noting that M4C is now the single most influential forum in the tactical community (as per Ken Hackathorn, referencing its effect on manufacturers and on buyers), and see how manufacturers that are not IMMEDIATELY forthright about all this kind of stuff get treated. Hint: they are chucked immediately. Businesses are killed on those forums for failing to play the game correctly. It is very foolish to ignore this trend.

This approach has not spread to the entire world yet. But it will. The rest of the world lags behind the US as far as the AR goes for obvious reasons. But the US is influential, and what has happened there, will happen here, and everywhere else, sooner or later. You can be behind the power curve or ahead of it, but I recommend ahead.

NEA is not being held up to an unreasonable level of scrutiny UNLESS we take the position that they are not intended to be anything more than a Bushmaster or DPMS. If that's the case, fine. But my understanding was that they intended to be much more. Well, this is what comes with being much more. You no longer appeal strictly to a fan base of the uneducated or the indifferent. If you want to be chosen by discerning customers, you must face discerning customers, and when they turn the microscope on you, you still have to look good.

 

[enefgee]

When did NEA say they built the best rifle in the world?

What we have is a company who built a Canadian AR15 under $1k, they've never claimed it to be anything more than that.

Frankly, I think it takes quite a bit of genius to do what NEA has done, there were lots of folks who said it couldn't be done at all, now it's shipping.

 

[Dude in G.P.]

Basically it comes down to PR - simple. Misanthropist is right, as is MWL, the main AR players have pretty much complied with the information age. In my opinion, NEA has made all the indications of wanting to be a major player in the arms industry. This is what is different between them and other Canadian Manufacturers like ATRS and Dlask. ATRS and Dlask build great guns to be sure, but their scope has been more in the custom build range.

NEA has got modern equipment for mass production, alluded to overseas contracts with foreign gov'ts, have built an international dealer network. All of that says Major Player. Yes, to go with the big dogs, you have to be open. NEA under reason of confidentiallity cannot name their overseas costomers - ok fair enough, but that means, as a civilian, I am only concerned with what they do with the Canadian civilian market. I want to know all those details even though the price is to compete with Norcs and the like. Hell, I want NEA to kick ass on the Canadian market and to succeed on the international market - It's a source of Pride for me. " See that AR being used out there to win competitions and the like, yep - It's Canadian"

But unless NEA wishes to give up some info, like other major manufacturers, this simply won't happen. As well, when NEA posts, the information has to be correct.

NEA stated in another post that the ARC process makes barrels stronger. Nitrocarburizing is a process that inpregnates the parent material with a combination of Nitrogen/Carbon in addition to Unobtaimium compounds to create a harder, longer lasting wear surface. It does not make 4150 stronger, as that is a function of UTS or Ultimate Tensile Strength.

Quote:

"To answer the question about our elusive and secretive ARC+ barrel processing we're using. We will not go into specifics about the process other than it is an advanced form of Nitrocarburizing. Why is it advanced, how is it applied; It's a trade secret and will not be discussed. "

"What does it do? We take a match grade polygonal rifled barrel barrel and treat it in such a way that the end product is a very strong, very consistent shooter. We are left with a barrel with a dull grey finish. The longevity is such that we are confidant in providing an unparalleled lifetime warranty on them. "

 

[North Eastern Arms]

NEA stated in another post that the ARC process makes barrels stronger. Nitrocarburizing is a process that inpregnates the parent material with a combination of Nitrogen/Carbon in addition to Unobtaimium compounds to create a harder, longer lasting wear surface. It does not make 4150 stronger, as that is a function of UTS or Ultimate Tensile Strength.

Quote:

"To answer the question about our elusive and secretive ARC+ barrel processing we're using. We will not go into specifics about the process other than it is an advanced form of Nitrocarburizing. Why is it advanced, how is it applied; It's a trade secret and will not be discussed. "

"What does it do? We take a match grade polygonal rifled barrel barrel and treat it in such a way that the end product is a very strong, very consistent shooter. We are left with a barrel with a dull grey finish. The longevity is such that we are confidant in providing an unparalleled lifetime warranty on them. "

Seriously?

Perhaps "tough" is a more appropriate word than strong. We all know what Nitrocarburizing does... Guys, I'm a ex-grunt, I don't even know the plating specs of the fork I'm eating my eggs with right now. I know that it's sharp and food sticks to it long enough for it to get to my mouth.

I'm trying to pass on technical information from mouth to ear to hand, so that I can attempt to answer the questions posed. That I'm trying to do to the best of my ability. I'm sorry that I can't afford to pull an engineer off the line for $70/hr to blog it out on CGN and create a tech manual with all the numbers and graphs some people want. We don't have the time and manpower to do such things. Some people are fine with what we're able to give. Those that aren't, obviously have enough of an issue with it to make them step back and consider the purchase. We're not saying don't do that. If you have doubts, please don't buy it. Some day we'll have the time and resources to put all this technical mumbo jumbo down for you to read and you can decide then.

Until then it's just a rifle. If it appeals to you then buy it, shoot it and enjoy it. That's what's it's supposed to do. If you are more concerned with it's ability to fly to the moon or shoot down an asteroid or the incorrect usage of a singe word we put on paper, then you're going to have to wait. We're just trying to focus our energy on building them, and building them right.

Had I been prepared for a "usage" exam in each of those responses I may have chosen differently.. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for us.. so we have to choose which group we can make happy right now. If you're int he group is not happy, I wish there was more I can do to please you right now, but there isn't.

In the meantime we're doing the best we can to get there.

 

[North Eastern Arms]

In the meantime.. if you have a technical question that you'd like answered put it down in a concise and direct format, email it in and I'll try and get you the answer. Obviously the ad-hoc format of the internet is not doing us any favors in trying to get this out. If you have a concern raise it directly and I'll do what I can to address it directly.

 

[Hawkmoon]

Actually, when representatives from a company come onto a forum and start making comments along the lines of "We made our (insert NEA part of your choice here) out of/in this way because our (aerospace?) engineers told us it was better than (insert alternative industry standard part/process from Colt/BCM/DD/LMT/etc. here) then they are the ones who are asserting that they know more/better than the Tier1 manufacturers.

The problem is that the NEA guys thought that they could come on here and tell everyone that they have built the best AR in the world, and everyone would fall over themselves to buy one, after all, it is made in Canada. They get asked a few questions and suddenly they act like someone asked them for the Coke recipe.

As misanthropist stated this sort of behaviour doesn't fly any longer. If they had tried this on one of the more serious forums such as SOCNET, Lightfighter, or even M4Carbine, the only response to this type of behaviour would have been "don't let the door hit you in the vagin@ on the way out".

I think we have been pretty tolerant, but their responses haven't left me wanting to rush out and try one of their guns. I was looking at their barrels, but the lack of information makes me think again. This is usually the type of answers that companies like Oly and DPMS get away with on AR15.com.

Regards.

Mark

Actually NEA is part of an Aerospace manufacturing company, therefore they do have aerospace engineers. Do your own research on the company....

Where did they say they manufacture the "BEST" AR in the world?? It is possible that they do know what they are doing... and who's to say they don't measure up to the "TIER 1" manufacturers... after all those "TIER 1" companies started out as small producers who found a better way of building a mousetrap... is it not possible that NEA has done the same????

BTW go to DD, LMT, BCM and others and ask for the whole process, materials and specs of what they build, you'd be laughed out of the building....

Well thanks for saying CGN is not a "SERIOUS" forum... I mean heaven forbid that we compare ourselves to Lightfighter, SOCNEt, or even M4Carbine... It's not like we have any experts on here who know a thing or two about firearms, or the manufacturing process... Only the big US forums or companies would know that...


I think it's pretty apparent you have no desire to listen, research or even buy a NEA product, which is fine.... I'll buy the barrel you were going to... look for the facts and do your own research without bias if you can..

Reading your posts feels like you have an axe to grind.. don't know if you do or not, and quite honestly I really don't give a crap if you do.. Just come out and admit it...


Whatever,
Hawkmoon

PS: Good job by the OP on taking the time and patience for doing this research and posting it. Some others could learn by your example..

 

[Dude in G.P.]

Yep Seriously, Tough is a better word than strong , it's more precise and describes what the ARC+ process is bringing to the table. Belittling the comment is beside the point.

Again Seriously, taking an Engineer for say a day - $700 plus expenses, is going to be a lot cheaper than you at your keyboard responding to questions or in debates or whatever.

Quote:

"We're actually doing one up right now." That was Oct 31st.

As for the damned if you do statement - How? Get a list together, have your Engineer approve it. Delete the confindential information and move forward. Yes put that FAQ list on your section of CGN. Will people ask questions, of course, but at least all the "mumbo jumbo" will be partially dealt with.

In the end, that is up to you how to proceed. Will it stop me from buying NEA? No. the products have spoken for themselves in the aftermarket accessory portion.

The AR game, that's a different story.

 

[Milsparro]

6061 billet (what NEA's using) is on par with 7075 forged is what OP said, right?

 

[North Eastern Arms]

Yep Seriously, Tough is a better word than strong , it's more precise and describes what the ARC+ process is bringing to the table. Belittling the comment is beside the point.

Again Seriously, taking an Engineer for say a day - $700 plus expenses, is going to be a lot cheaper than you at your keyboard responding to questions or in debates or whatever.

Quote:

"We're actually doing one up right now." That was Oct 31st.

As for the damned if you do statement - How? Get a list together, have your Engineer approve it. Delete the confindential information and move forward. Yes put that FAQ list on your section of CGN. Will people ask questions, of course, but at least all the "mumbo jumbo" will be partially dealt with.

In the end, that is up to you how to proceed. Will it stop me from buying NEA? No. the products have spoken for themselves in the aftermarket accessory portion.

The AR game, that's a different story.

Sounds easy enough from the outside I suppose. However in practice.. However taking an engineer to CGN means that he's not working on his projects, which costs us mush more than $700/day. It's all a matter of allocation and trying to juggle resources.

I guess the bottom line is that we have to address issues in terms of importance. We will get to it, it's just not at the top of our list right now. In the meantime we're just trying to do what we can to sit in the mid ground between not answering anything and spending all day in here.

It'll happen.. but not overnight.

We're happy with the product. People that have it are happy with the product. Those that have tested it are happy. So we're happy. We're working on refining the product. We'll have to work on those that are unhappy with the paper next..

 

[Dude in G.P.]

LOL!! Yeah, all us Geeks who look at specs, procedures and engineering details all day......

 

[North Eastern Arms]

.. I liked things before the internet. Used to just be word of mouth made you famous.

 

[MWL]

Hawkmoon,

Asking questions of a manufacturer is part of the research process. How else will I know what processes, materials, etc. I need to do further research on? Also, just as an FYI, I have two degrees specializing in research and research methodology.

As for getting manufacturing details from the Tier1 manufacturers, go here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

and you will see that all the reputable manufacturers have already supplied the information that I, and others, are looking for from NEA. There is also plenty of other information out there if you look hard enough, and are able to put two and two together. You can also find information on which countries are actually using their products (eg: LMT is in use by the UK, Diemaco/Colt Canada is/was used by Denmark, Norway, Ireland, etc. including some of their more elite units).

You will also see that those manufacturers that have declined to provide this information, are generally producers of substandard junk. Are we to infer that that is also the case with NEA? I, and others, who actually want to know more about the products we buy before laying down our hard earned cash, are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but we can't do that until we know what we are dealing with.

If NEA have indeed built a better mousetrap, then they are the new Glock in the AR world, however, they have strayed so far from the accepted norms in just about every aspect, that we are currently unable to compare them to the accepted leaders in the field, due to lack of information. If their only intention was to build a $1000 AR, then they should just come out and say so.

I know that NEA is part of an aerospace company, why do you think I wrote "(aerospace?) engineers" in the post that you referenced? I am assuming (as that is all I can do at this point with the information that I have read) that it is a group of aerospace engineers that have been advising on this project.

Not to take anything away from the great work he did, but with regards to misanthropist's research, I was part of the discussion on another forum where forum members supplied him with some of the links and information he posted at the start of this thread. He obviously wanted more actual information than being told that if he didn't buy one his #### would fall off.

With regard to CGN stacking up against other forums, I read a couple of discussions here, that were going on at the same time as other forums. I don't remember C. Read Knight, or Larry Vickers adding to the discussions here. Just go into some of the legal threads here, and look at some of the garbage being spewed by people who obviously don't know what they are talking about, but they must be right, because they have high post counts. Ever see anyone being told to get back in their lane here? I would equate this forum with Arfcom or Glocktalk as far as hard facts and industry professionals go.

You accuse me of bias, but from the tone of your post, you've already had a sip of the NEA coolaid. I really don't care if you want to spend your money on a product that you have no hard information on, it just leaves more quality guns and parts for those of use who do.

Regards (or should that be WHATEVER?)

Mark

 

[enefgee]

As a forum my understanding of CGN's purpose is to provide a place for Canada's recreational shooters to communicate with each other. It is a general forum, as such it attracts a broader audience than most of the US fora. Of course we don't have Larry Vickers, Hilton Yam, Chris Costa etc on CGN - after all they aren't really allowed to do business here are they (unless we're all DSP83 - which with a couple of possible exceptions, we're mostly not). I would liken CGN to a State level GOA board, which going by population is what it should be. If you're drilling for hard core data on something, CGN isn't and shouldn't be a good source, it's not designed for that and it's unfair to expect it to be that kind of forum. CGN has however had a profound impact on Canada's political scene, and if that is all it ever does then it has accomplished more than a specialized board ever will. Ask Mark Holland.

 

[clickclickboom]

This is exciting opcorn:
CGNN you help my work days go by.

 

[MWL]

True

Don't get me wrong, I am not putting CGN down. I am a member of CGN because I can get information here (once I filter out the #### falling off posts) that I can't get anywhere else. Mainly legal and political information. I also try to hit as many of the polls as I can when they are listed here.

However, I would hesitate to ask for certain advice here, and that is why I am a member of those other forums. However, I feel that some questions could be moderated a little better. For example, when a "noob" asks the weekly 'is it ok to use 10 round pistol mags in my AR?', we don't have some guy with 5000+ posts coming on and telling him no, it's illegal, and then having a 5 page discussion because he thinks he is right because that's what the guy at the gun shop told him the CFO told his brother-in-laws wife.

I go through times when I deliberately stay out of some discussions, despite reading what is a load of BS from some of the respondents, because life is too short to deal with idiots. It usually gets sorted in the end, but when we get KevinB answering a question, and the next respondent states the exact opposite, based on the one time he saw something, or that his sample of one does something else, then I have to walk away.

Regards.

Mark

 

[North Eastern Arms]

As for getting manufacturing details from the Tier1 manufacturers, go here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

I hope you also noted that list is Commercial M4's.. All have forged receivers, 2-piece handguards and front sight blocks. We do not build a M4 patterned rifle, but you still want us to compare against that list?

You will also see that those manufacturers that have declined to provide this information, are generally producers of substandard junk.

.. I noticed that LWRC and KAC (as well as quite a few others) aren't on the list.. does that mean that they're substandard junk? I thought that they were tier 1 manufacturers.. Or is it because they don't have a rifle in the tabled configuration? Just wondering if we're an apple or an orange. because it looks like you found a list on the internet and want to apply it out of context to prove a point about our substandard junk.

If their only intention was to build a $1000 AR, then they should just come out and say so.

Our intention was to build an $1000 AR.

.. Glad that's out of the way.

I go through times when I deliberately stay out of some discussions, despite reading what is a load of BS from some of the respondents, because life is too short to deal with idiots.

I think I know what you mean.

 

[Hawkmoon]

Hawkmoon,

Asking questions of a manufacturer is part of the research process. How else will I know what processes, materials, etc. I need to do further research on? Also, just as an FYI, I have two degrees specializing in research and research methodology.

As for getting manufacturing details from the Tier1 manufacturers, go here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

and you will see that all the reputable manufacturers have already supplied the information that I, and others, are looking for from NEA. There is also plenty of other information out there if you look hard enough, and are able to put two and two together. You can also find information on which countries are actually using their products (eg: LMT is in use by the UK, Diemaco/Colt Canada is/was used by Denmark, Norway, Ireland, etc. including some of their more elite units).

You will also see that those manufacturers that have declined to provide this information, are generally producers of substandard junk. Are we to infer that that is also the case with NEA? I, and others, who actually want to know more about the products we buy before laying down our hard earned cash, are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but we can't do that until we know what we are dealing with.

Have you been out and actually used an NEA AR??

If NEA have indeed built a better mousetrap, then they are the new Glock in the AR world, however, they have strayed so far from the accepted norms in just about every aspect, that we are currently unable to compare them to the accepted leaders in the field, due to lack of information. If their only intention was to build a $1000 AR, then they should just come out and say so.

I know that NEA is part of an aerospace company, why do you think I wrote "(aerospace?) engineers" in the post that you referenced? I am assuming (as that is all I can do at this point with the information that I have read) that it is a group of aerospace engineers that have been advising on this project.

Not to take anything away from the great work he did, but with regards to misanthropist's research, I was part of the discussion on another forum where forum members supplied him with some of the links and information he posted at the start of this thread. He obviously wanted more actual information than being told that if he didn't buy one his #### would fall off.

With regard to CGN stacking up against other forums, I read a couple of discussions here, that were going on at the same time as other forums. I don't remember C. Read Knight, or Larry Vickers adding to the discussions here. Just go into some of the legal threads here, and look at some of the garbage being spewed by people who obviously don't know what they are talking about, but they must be right, because they have high post counts. Ever see anyone being told to get back in their lane here? I would equate this forum with Arfcom or Glocktalk as far as hard facts and industry professionals go.

You accuse me of bias, but from the tone of your post, you've already had a sip of the NEA coolaid. I really don't care if you want to spend your money on a product that you have no hard information on, it just leaves more quality guns and parts for those of use who do.



Regards (or should that be WHATEVER?)

Mark

Well I'm happy for you and your two degrees. Did you think to contact the company "BEFORE" coming onto a public board and ask for this information as a research project?? I don't have a degree but commonsense dictates that if I was concerned about those things I would go to the source?!?!

So you consider Armalite and S&W cheap junk?? Is that part of your advanced degrees in research and reasearch methodology?? You studied all that Armalite and S&W has to offer, contacted their suppliers of parts and steel and have concluded that they are junk?? Or you rely upon an excel sheet posted on the internet....

I run an Armalite. I would put it up against anything out there, but I have never run an LMT. I however do know people who do and would give it the benefit of a doubt were I able to purchase one. Sometimes you can get over involved in the research and not in the doing....

Ahh and here we get to the crux of the matter. I believe that a Canadian company can manufacture a good reliable AR from scratch in 6 months and therefore I must have drunk the "Koolaid". Well actually I have exactly three pieces of NEA parts on my VZ... So I must be a shill correct??

Have you actually held an NEA AR or used it?? Looked at the machining, at the barrel and the parts?? I have and I would be willing to give it a try, when I get the money. I will await the paperwork and the torture reports at a later date. If it's out before I buy, all the better, I will study those specs and comparisons to see what they hold... However in the meantime I await payment for being a shill....

However until that time I have to go to work now and get my hands dirty instead of arguing on the internet....

Honestly, good luck with your reasearch...


"Regards"
Bernie

 

[North Eastern Arms]

However in the meantime I await payment for being a shill....

BTw.. you never did come by and pick up that $20 we promised you.

 

[Claven2]

In the meantime.. if you have a technical question that you'd like answered put it down in a concise and direct format, email it in and I'll try and get you the answer. Obviously the ad-hoc format of the internet is not doing us any favors in trying to get this out. If you have a concern raise it directly and I'll do what I can to address it directly.

I think if you answered the following question, a lot of people would stop griping.

"Do your barrel blanks comply with MIL-B-11595E, and if so, are they 4150ORDNANCE, ORDNANCE resulferized, or CMV? Also, are they parkerized under the gas block?"