Daniel Defence vs NEA

I asked that this thread be reopened because there were a number of untruths being thrown around.

While I have had a business arrangement with NEA through several different companies or entities, that has been terminated. I have not nor will I ever receive a dime from NEA for the PDW stock.

SPEX Defence is a corporate entity that never officially came to fruition. The website is really just the remainders of that effort. My corporate website is www.expatriotsound.com and it contains only sound suppressor stuff. I own a patent for a sound suppressor which I have licenced to NEA however to date no production has occurred and thus I have not received any royalties from NEA.

I do not work for NEA and I have never worked for NEA. I don't build guns and never have. My business Licence does not allow the manufacture and sale of firearms and it never has. My interest is in design and development. You will never see me manufacturing anything because that side of it bores me to death.

I would hope that people who don't know might refrain from making stuff up but this is the Internet after all so im not holding my breath. If you want to know about my company, just ask.
 
As I have tried to make abundantly clear I do have a business relationship with NEA (of fairly recent construction) but I'm not privy to every detail of their various arrangements; that would be a big job, obviously.

As such I'm not really up on expatriot sound. So I at least am interested in hearing about it.
 
I really want to know why that stock has been held up and why you don't force yourself into getting involved in manufacturing to get that thing to market. If the design has been tested I would imagine getting the components produced would really not be that much effort. I recently had an exhaust header designed and fabricated. It is now being manufactured. I didn't know jack about any of this before I started. It's been relatively easy.
 
Expatriot Sound Suppression is a limited company of which I am the president. The focus if the company is R&D on sound suppressors for the purpose of developing licenceable technologies. The company has never directly pursued sales and manufacturing of products direct to the end user and as such we have no mass production capacity.

I own a number of patents for novel sound suppressor technologies and continue to pursue new concepts in order to push silencer tech as far as possible. Expatriot silencers are some of the highest performing designs outside of the US and are equal in performance to the best silencer designs in the world. We built the first hearing safe 45 pistol can outside of the US. We also have a hearing safe 30 cal rifle can and a hearing safe 338 LM rifle can. Our 556 rifle can is small, lightweight, extremely rugged and very quiet as it pushes the limits of design and construction.
 
ridgearms said:
I really want to know why that stock has been held up and why you don't force yourself into getting involved in manufacturing to get that thing to market. If the design has been tested I would imagine getting the components produced would really not be that much effort. I recently had an exhaust header designed and fabricated. It is now being manufactured. I didn't know jack about any of this before I started. It's been relatively easy.
Click to expand...

I can't force another company to do anything. I have no financial or legal standing with NEA. They are going to produce what they want when they want and there is jack I can do about that.

My understanding is they have extensively researched a PDW stock design of their own. One problem with a stock like this is that there is a large amount of "previous artwork" as it may be. PDW type stocks as we know them for the AR have been around since the 1960's and have been done by a number of different companies. Making it difficult to assign ownership of an idea to any person. A lot of the original SPEX PDW stock came from existing sources. At best we put the thing together in a nice package in a way nobody had before.

I also discovered after the fact that the original test sample contained a serious flaw that could damage the gun. I didn't actually build that stock and just assumed the person who did knew what they were doing. This is what lead NEA to design their own stock.

All of which is a long winded way of saying I don't know what NEA is going to produce or even if they ever will produce a PDW stock or of it will be based on what we gave them or not. Those questions will have to be directed to NEA.
 
Last edited:
I saw NEA post up pics of a new stock that said coming soon... Really liked it but it will be another year before ill probably be able to get my hands on one.

Suputin - do you make muzzle breaks too? I need one for my rem 700 aac-sd in 308...its got a threaded barrel.
 
Claven2 said:
If memory serves, Suputin licensed his PDW stock design to NEA and sells them silencers which they re-sell as required. That is not the same as working for them, unless you consider FN to work for Colt because Colt licensed FN to use the M16 TDP and supply M16's to the US Gov't, sometimes with the odd Colt run of parts installed.

I also licensed a design to NEA (A VZ58 part in case it matters). I don't work for NEA and never have. The one business transaction I had with them went smoothly and I wish them the best of success, along with any other Canadian market entrants. I suspect Suputin's arrangement with them is similar.
Click to expand...

Where did I ever say that he worked for them? Please show me. I said that I believed that he had a business arrangement with them. I also said that I wasn't sure of the nature of that relationship and asked him for clarification, which he has now given. My point was that someone who has received monies from a company can hardly be seen as impartial.

After people started bringing attention to him as "an employee of NEA" he denied it, which of course is correct. What I found curious was that he seemed to deliberately sidestep the fact that he has done business with them. I found his comments somewhat misleading, which is why I asked for clarification.

I'm sure that his review was honest, it's a stock trigger for crying out loud.

Doesn't the US Gov't own the TDP?
 
ridgearms said:
I really want to know why that stock has been held up and why you don't force yourself into getting involved in manufacturing to get that thing to market. If the design has been tested I would imagine getting the components produced would really not be that much effort. I recently had an exhaust header designed and fabricated. It is now being manufactured. I didn't know jack about any of this before I started. It's been relatively easy.
Click to expand...

This stock?
http://soldiersystems.net/2013/01/11/north-eastern-arms-introduces-css/

I'm told the reason that it took so long to release was the extensive testing and redesign involved. It's no exhaust header but it contains a completely re engineered return and buffer system for the AR.

Perhaps this should be a thread all it's own, but this thread is off track enough already.
 
Last edited:
Leg said:
Where did I ever say that he worked for them? Please show me. I said that I believed that he had a business arrangement with them. I also said that I wasn't sure of the nature of that relationship and asked him for clarification, which he has now given. My point was that someone who has received monies from a company can hardly be seen as impartial.

After people started bringing attention to him as "an employee of NEA" he denied it, which of course is correct. What I found curious was that he seemed to deliberately sidestep the fact that he has done business with them. I found his comments somewhat misleading, which is why I asked for clarification.

I'm sure that his review was honest, it's a stock trigger for crying out loud.

Doesn't the US Gov't own the TDP?
Click to expand...

No, Colt owns it and a condition of their contracts with the US GOV is that the US gov can use it for their own purposes, but cannot use it to allow other market entrants without a contractual arrangement with Colt. Pretty standard stuff.

I didn;t mean to imply you made that accusation, someone further up the thread made a more direct accusation that he worked for NEA, but yours was the last post referencing the topic before I hit reply - sorry.
 
I would be interested to learn the trigger pull of both rifles, don't know if Suputin has access to a trigger pull gauge. Early NEAs reportedly had a ridiculously heavy trigger pull, be nice to know what newer examples are at.
 
Leg said:
I would be interested to learn the trigger pull of both rifles, don't know if Suputin has access to a trigger pull gauge. Early NEAs reportedly had a ridiculously heavy trigger pull, be nice to know what newer examples are at.
Click to expand...

THIS was exactly the point of the OP. Scuttlebut put the NEA trigger in the shat region. I expected little when I shot it. DD has a stellar reputation, I expected a lot when I shot it. The result was they were essentially the same. Not amazing but not fully awful either.

Clearly from my little experience, neither company's trigger lives up to their reputation.
 
I was shocked at how poor the DD trigger was, out of the box. It was so bad I had trouble doing an ammo test with it.

I put a dab of fine non-embedding lapping compound on the trigger and cycled it a few hundred times. Then I cleaned it and put on a dab of moly grease. Much better!

I do this with almost all the new rifles and pistols and it makes an improvement. I should have done this before going to the range.

I am sure the same treatment would improve the NEA, too.

But now the DD sports a Rock River match trigger. A huge improvement. Won't leave home without it...
 
Suputin said:
THIS was exactly the point of the OP. Scuttlebut put the NEA trigger in the shat region. I expected little when I shot it. DD has a stellar reputation, I expected a lot when I shot it. The result was they were essentially the same. Not amazing but not fully awful either.

Clearly from my little experience, neither company's trigger lives up to their reputation.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I would have expected a lot from either trigger. We are talking about the stock design after all. They should both prove to be reliable, if unremarkable, triggers. They may even come from the same manufacturer, not too many out there make their own.
 
I really don't understand what people are expecting out of a DD trigger?
The complete DD LPK retails for $105.00 Canadian!!!
What next a comparison against a $300.00 JP trigger?
 
For all those haters of NEA out there yes they might not be as good as DD right now but they are still new the the AR scene have been constantly improving their product.
They are the best hope for Canada to have a steady supply of high quality AR's (that dont run you $2000).
Further they are one of the few AR's that come stock fully railed and all new ones have milspec buffer tubes.
Customer service is good and its easy to send them in on warranty seeing as the factory is in Canada.
Anyway my two cents on that. At this time would recommend grabbing a DD if you have the money especially with everything that is going on in the states.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom