... Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the 102 in any way, I just think it's stupid to be posting pics of tombstones for the MH like the 102 will be the end of it after a couple range reviews that so far have only shown that it is reliable after you modify your magazines. This is a great start but hardly even a feeler for what the rifle will be once more people start shooting them. I'm hoping NEA has their QC department tuned in as well, I'd hate to see guys having problems with these.
Even though I have absolutely no use for another rifle like this since I already have a MH in 6.5cm, a full custom M305 with Krieger barrel plus a less modified M305 I may have to give the 102 a try if the positive reports keep coming.
I don't think it's really a fair comparison between the two rifles anyway, to me the 102 is competition for the DPMS AR-10 series and the Modern Hunter is more along the lines of Knights Armament or LMT but even that is a little off since those are still going for military rifle so reliability is still top priority even though they supply a premium barrel while ATRS may have sacrificed a little reliability for improved accuracy not realizing that there are very few people who are capable of shooting well enough to notice but everyone notices when the rifle jams.
Already been over the other stuff to death. When I first got into AR308 rifles about 13 years ago, I would have thought your post made sense. Around the same time that I bought my DPMS LR308. I later learned the differences. While I didn't post the tombstone pic, I completely agree with it. The NEA 102 has just made the MH obsolete.
With regards to the "shown that it is reliable after you modify your magazines" comment. The XCR-M mags are a step above the DPMS mags but just. They are still at the bottom of the rung and if it wasn't for the 10 round pistol capacity, no one would buy them. I have 5 of these mags from when I bought my DPMS GII rifle. 3 are in spec, 2 aren't. The modifying of the mags is to put them in spec. That's a mag manufacturing QC issue, not the rifle.
I didn't post the tombstone pic, but I fully agree with it. If they were both the same cost I would still choose the NEA 102 based purely on the design vs the MH. The MH is a franken gun based on an American Spirit Arms upper and a DPMS LR308 lower with high end parts and low end parts from various manufacturers mixed together. The best part of the MH is the billet upper/lower. Hence the fit/finish comments. The NEA is an AR10 with NEA making almost all the parts in house. The recent specs I've seen on the NEA BCG etc is very good. Their upper/lower is forged which is next level manufacturing over billet.
The NEA 102 is competition for the Armalite AR10 which is significantly above the DPMS LR308 gen1 rifles. When I bought my first AR308 about 13 years ago it was a DPMS LR308 as they were $1500 ($1750 after I had the crap trigger replaced) vs the $3000 price tag for the Armalite AR10. Years later the price of the Armalite came down to 2K. I picked up an AR10t prototype from the Canadian military program. Night and day vs the DPMS. Armalite was serious competition back when KAC won the US contract. Today KAC has spent a lot of time R&D to refine their product and it's one if not the best AR308 out there. The DPMS Gen1... it's a toy in comparison to either of these rifles.
The DPMS BCG used in the MH along with the springs etc that are DPMS would normally be found housed in a 6061 extruded aluminum upper/lower. These parts are lowest bid, high volume cheap stuff. Their market share is high volume consumer grade. In most cases ie low shooting volume, these parts will be just fine. But they are a far cry from the serious machines. Don't let a pretty billet upper/lower fool you into thinking otherwise. They shine on low cost and availability. There is an entire market built on providing high end versions of these low end parts as the system is frequently used for hobby builds and unless it's a budget build, no one wants the low end parts in a high end build.
The NEA 102 is a true Canadian in house built firearm (exception of barrel blank I believe). It's not parts/bits sourced and thrown together. It's also a better system than the DPMS gen1. If NEA keeps their QC together, then the tombstone pic is very appropriate. NEA better not screw this up, since they really have a home run with this one if it's done right.
