Is NEA okay now ?

NEA has issues that's no hidden secret. My Gen 2 fit and finish is tier 1. The upper and lower has 0 play in it making this rifle feel sword like which is hard to accomplish with the AR 2 pin design. I bought mine used for 950. Spent 400 replacing broken parts. Still under what i would've paid for new when you factor in the taxes. NEA has not fulfilled any warranty issues. That being said I plan on buying at least 2 more NEA rifles I own a 7.5 7.62x39. Looking to go 556 in both 10.5 and 14.5. Made in Canada matters. I hate that their customer service is #### because that isn't very Canadian.
 
rubberdonuts said:
NEA has issues that's no hidden secret. My Gen 2 fit and finish is tier 1. The upper and lower has 0 play in it making this rifle feel sword like which is hard to accomplish with the AR 2 pin design. I bought mine used for 950. Spent 400 replacing broken parts. Still under what i would've paid for new when you factor in the taxes. NEA has not fulfilled any warranty issues. That being said I plan on buying at least 2 more NEA rifles I own a 7.5 7.62x39. Looking to go 556 in both 10.5 and 14.5. Made in Canada matters. I hate that their customer service is #### because that isn't very Canadian.
Click to expand...

play with upper and lower makes absolutely no difference to the AR accuracy or reliability as long as the lower and upper are built to mil spec.

1500 would have gotten you a used colt 6920
think about that...
 
FrankieT said:
This is my experience as well. I tried one of their latest gen CCS and it wasn't built to spec. I initially contacted the retailer who kindly directed me to an NEA rep. Communications was horrible. My emails were ignored so the retailer actually had to email NEA to encourage them to answer me. I finally found out that NONE of their CCS were built to spec.

Getting the stock back to the retailer was also troublesome since NEA again stopped responding to me and the retailer. Finally the retailer just decided to give me my money back and they would chase NEA.

Coles Notes on NEA:

Good ideas
Poor execution
Poor customer service
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate what was out of spec?
 
I had no issue with NEA customer support. The rail on my 10.5 upper had movement (it was the old style rail) and was brand new. I emailed them, they said to send them the upper, and they replaced it with the new gen rail, no problem. Should it have left them in this state to begin with? Well, no, but they did fix the issue and it is rock solid now.
 
Sniffer said:
Care to elaborate what was out of spec?
Click to expand...

I have a Colt Canada lower receiver.

The Colt knuckle hole measures 0.499". The CCS knuckle measured 0.503". I was able to find the blueprint spec which is 0.499" + 0.004" -0.000". So in theory, the knuckle should be between 0.498" and 0.502" to meet spec, but for universal fit it should be less than 0.499". Since it measures 0.503", it cannot possibly fit into the hole. As an aside, my A1 stock knuckle measured about 0.473 and fit fine. They advertise that the stock fits all milspec lowers. Mine is clearly milspec. They offered to grind the CCS knuckle, which I declined because it would eliminate the finish, and I wasn't about to accept that fact.

The side rails also had no clearance with the receiver. I couldn't find any specs for that.

The fact that none of their inventory of CCS could fit my CC receiver (their admission) means that none are built to spec.
 
Sniffer said:
Care to elaborate what was out of spec?
Click to expand...

Well their website doesn't give any details but I would guess the lower is not 7075-T6, the barrel isn't 11595E or 4150CmV steel, the chamber and bore is not chrome lined, they don't publish twist rate but my bet is it's 1:9 which is not mil spec. Their bolts and carriers are definitely not mil spec. Not sure if their receiver extension is mil spec or com spec either. Add in the fit issues and regular major component failures and I think it's safe to say their guns in general are far from being mil spec.

I know mil spec is not THE spec but it is a set of specifications to use as a benchmark and most manufacturers don't make the cut.
 
mikethebike said:
play with upper and lower makes absolutely no difference to the AR accuracy or reliability as long as the lower and upper are built to mil spec.

1500 would have gotten you a used colt 6920
think about that...
Click to expand...

After "thinking about it" it made lots of sense. 950 for a lightly used Canadian made AR with 5 xcr magazines and a bushnell trs 25 was a no brainer. Spending 400 on top was easy. I'll break it down for ya seeing how your so perplexed.
NEA put a Carbine Buffer weight in which couldn't handle the pressure of the 7.62x39 being shot from a 7.5 barrel. Castle nut came loose off the stakes allowing the detent and spring to release into the action. An easy and cheap fix. Although the fix was cheap, I didn't want this problem again, so i trashed those components and went Mil Spec on the buffer tube, new spring, magpul ctr stock, magpul qd backplate, T2 buffer, and noveske kx5 pig on the muzzle end. All that for 400. Had I purchased this new I imagine NEA would have fixed this issue under warranty I "imagine".

Now my only issues lie with those darn XCR mags that don't like to be fully loaded and finding cheap non corrosive ammo to fill them with.

Had I bought this rifle new and without warning from literally everybody and their mother this story mightve ended differently. Luckily ARs aren't rocket science and are easily fixed with the right parts.
 
Last edited:
My NEA 15 showed up today in the mail, and with all the bad reviews I was hesitant to get to excited about the big unboxing but I was very pleasantly surprised. The rifle appears to be in great shape. No damage, dings or imperfections in the burnt bronze colors at all. I stripped it down and gave the whole thing a good once over and a good cleaning. Everything was just how it should be. The most exciting part was it came with the new foregrip as I can make a fairly safe bet that this is the latest generation.

Hopefully I will be getting out to the range later this week to break it in and do up a bit of a range report.
 
I'm not worried about the finish, it's half of it breaking after only 1000 rds and out of specs receiver.
I'm likely to get a bunch if uppers to play around with calibers but I found some instances of incompatibilities with other brands receivers.
 
This thread was really over on the second post.

Windham > NEA. I've owned multiples of both and still have my Windhams running 100%. Relatively the same price too.
 
Checked out a new one locally today. Upper to lower fit was pretty sloppy, finish was missing in multiple locations, plenty of machining marks on the exterior finish - kind of left it at that.
 
rubberdonuts said:
After "thinking about it" it made lots of sense. 950 for a lightly used Canadian made AR with 5 xcr magazines and a bushnell trs 25 was a no brainer. Spending 400 on top was easy. I'll break it down for ya seeing how your so perplexed.
NEA put a Carbine Buffer weight in which couldn't handle the pressure of the 7.62x39 being shot from a 7.5 barrel. Castle nut came loose off the stakes allowing the detent and spring to release into the action. An easy and cheap fix. Although the fix was cheap, I didn't want this problem again, so i trashed those components and went Mil Spec on the buffer tube, new spring, magpul ctr stock, magpul qd backplate, T2 buffer, and noveske kx5 pig on the muzzle end. All that for 400. Had I purchased this new I imagine NEA would have fixed this issue under warranty I "imagine".

Now my only issues lie with those darn XCR mags that don't like to be fully loaded and finding cheap non corrosive ammo to fill them with.

Had I bought this rifle new and without warning from literally everybody and their mother this story mightve ended differently. Luckily ARs aren't rocket science and are easily fixed with the right parts.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna be a bit of a jerk here. Canadian made crap is still crap. The TRS is Chinese made crap and XCR mags are pretty low on the scale as well. The rest of your issues with the rifle shouldn't have happened in the first place if the rifle was properly built. The CTR stock and other Magpul bits do absolutely nothing for reliability so there is no sense in listing them, same goes for the comp.

Aside from your selecting a 7.62x39 AR( a poor choice in my opinion and for many reasons) A known quantity and known quality AR could have been bought for similar money. A Colt OEM rifle can be had for around $1100 NEW. Add your $400 in accessories and you're well equipped for $1500 bucks. A mere $150 more than you already spent on a (used)rifle that you don't trust and has already proven to be unreliable and/or poorly made. Yes you still saved money by comparison but had you bought new you would have spent the same or more. As others have said a Wyndham AR would have served you well as would a Stag, or any of the other well known reputable brands. With some patience a guy could have a well made AR off the EE for a song.

Someone else posted that an AR is not rocket science and really they aren't. Which begs the question why after nearly sixty years of existence some companies struggle to get it right...
 
brand new upper 10.5 inch upper. bolt is gritty , charging handle too. 60 rounds later my barrel nut is loose. Don't have the wrench for it so there's goes warranty work ... shoulda got a US made upper...

well , gotta pay to learn sometimes!
 
Heads up. Getting my billet upper replaced because the charging handle latch was wearing down the notch so then it became smooth and so the handle would not stay in place from the recoil. Mine is first gen PDW length. YMMV
 
Kidd X said:
I'm gonna be a bit of a jerk here. Canadian made crap is still crap. The TRS is Chinese made crap and XCR mags are pretty low on the scale as well. The rest of your issues with the rifle shouldn't have happened in the first place if the rifle was properly built. The CTR stock and other Magpul bits do absolutely nothing for reliability so there is no sense in listing them, same goes for the comp.

Aside from your selecting a 7.62x39 AR( a poor choice in my opinion and for many reasons) A known quantity and known quality AR could have been bought for similar money. A Colt OEM rifle can be had for around $1100 NEW. Add your $400 in accessories and you're well equipped for $1500 bucks. A mere $150 more than you already spent on a (used)rifle that you don't trust and has already proven to be unreliable and/or poorly made. Yes you still saved money by comparison but had you bought new you would have spent the same or more. As others have said a Wyndham AR would have served you well as would a Stag, or any of the other well known reputable brands. With some patience a guy could have a well made AR off the EE for a song.

Someone else posted that an AR is not rocket science and really they aren't. Which begs the question why after nearly sixty years of existence some companies struggle to get it right...
Click to expand...

Colt OEM. You mean the Expanse? That's not a colt. The magpul bits and muzzle device is where the money was spent. Read between the lines. NEA is a great bang for your buck. As long as it goes bang...........
 
i have not fired one but i did look at the finish on it and it was terrible. it makes me wonder if they even have a quality control department because a company that cares about their products would never have allowed this to leave the factory.

some areas of the finish were glossy while others were matte. the anodizing inside the round holes on the rail looks like it wasnt even completed.. the safety felt really sharp to the point where you must wear gloves if you planned on using it. the area inside the magwell looked like poop. i heard that there were quite a few that NEA "forgot" to drill gas ports.

i would never spend a few hundred dollars on a firearm when i really dont know if im going to get one that was made properly or not but, hey, some people enjoy the project.

20jqvj7.jpg


20r1qgm.jpg


2hx85sg.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom