Is the BCL 102 worth it?

This is disheartening, they've been producing the rifles for a while and shipping overseas. I had hopped that given the time it was taking at the lab, and the time for feedback and QC with foreign orders that they would hit the market strong. Consistency seems to be a real killer, and being consistently inconsistent doesn't' count lol. It's great that the parts compatibility is there, what sucks is _having_ to go that route.

I'm sure many of us are tired of crossing fingers hoping we got a good one, only to work out teething problems.

Travis Bickle said:
...
So I have to say no. It's not worth the money but that's to me. You pay $1750 essentially for a NR AR10 upper and lower. Then you have to swap the trigger, swap extractors, swap barrels, swap bolts etc etc just to make it run reliably. The real trouble seems to be in rifle to rifle consistency. Each rifle seems to be its own odd finicky entity. So on top of all else prior, you are still tossing the dice. Not worth it to me. I was really hoping they wouldn't NEA this one. Fool me twice right.....
Will see what they do for round two.
Click to expand...
 
the nea 25 , was being used in NZ for a long time , and used for hunting ... i dont remember anyone , swapping everything out and complaining , was it abetter rifle , or does it say more about the customer ....
 
JGE said:
Lol, Funny that everyone that doesn't have one wants it to be a failure. Any 102 thread is just littered with how terrible the rifle is and all the parts that need to be replaced. If you are having issues, here's a thought, contact bcl about fixing it instead of whining on cgn.

Rant over...

Is the 102 worth it, depends on what you are looking for. If NR, I would say yes as not many rifles in this price range that are also NR. Maybe you will have issues, maybe you won't. Never dealt with NEA so when I get a 102, on second pre order, we'll see how it goes. Worse case you can always sell it.
Click to expand...

Funny that most of the guys with them either say mine works so they're great yet they completely ignore the reports from other owners who have issues or they just completely accept the rifle is a piece of crap and plan to replace every piece possible right from the start without using the manufacturer's warranty.

You're right and I've been giving the same advice, rather than replace everything yourself if you get a rifle that has issues every owner should be contacting BCL and (politely) asking them to correct every issue until it's running reliably. Then if you want to change things go for it and enjoy the modularity of the AR platform but no one should be paying $1750 plus tax and accepting anything but a rifle that functions 100%.
I don't expect sub moa accuracy from a cheap factory barrel but I do expect every rifle to work.

Your worst case scenario of selling it isn't that great, if you have a rifle that doesn't function it will be pretty hard to sell.

BCL/NEA should be paying shipping both directions for warranty work on their rifles. It would be different if it was one rifle out of one hundred with issues but this is much worse and the customer shouldn't have to pay when there is a known QC issue with the company.


stumpy-kiwi said:
the nea 25 , was being used in NZ for a long time , and used for hunting ... i dont remember anyone , swapping everything out and complaining , was it abetter rifle , or does it say more about the customer ....
Click to expand...

To me I would think it either means BCL/NEA does a better job on QC with exports than they do for domestic sales or the guys over in NZ are more like our more adventurous members who instead of complaining just accept it's a base to build off of and fix it themselves.


The rifle has the potential to be a great rifle that everyone who likes these type rifles would love to have in their collection but BCL really needs to step up their game and make sure every rifle that makes it to the customer works as advertised. If they don't and there continues to be a high failure rate it won't take much more than batch number two for everyone to move on and the 102 and BCL will be history in Canada. NEA had a horrible reputation and they lost a lot of sales because of it and so far it seems like it was simply a name change and nothing else.
 
Last edited:
cr5 said:
I think that if BCL can get every rifle leaving their shop working perfectly every time and dumps the "match" chamber the 102 is a very good rifle for $1750, but if they continue to let parts out the door that are no good then it's not worth the risk and I won't be buying one.
It's not a sniper rifle out of the box but if you want to you can make it one. I just want it to work 100% of the time the way it comes from the manufacturer without having to buy parts and change things just to make it work. It has a lot of potential.
Click to expand...

I concur. I do believe the folks that get a "good one" and are quite happy with NEA/BCL rifles and have a hard time understanding what all the complaints are about. I also believe and have experienced the garbage NEA lets out for sale. The consumer seems to be the "QC department" for them, and yes SFRC has been great to deal with for returns, no complaint there.
Either way, nobody should be sending a $1750 rifle BACK for QC issues in this day and age. NEA's problem from the beginning was two fold... consistency, and their need to deviate from standard drawings and materials.
I'm 0/4 on NEA AR15 parts (bolt blew up, barrel bored way off center, upper had gaps all around dust cover, brake with huge machine gouge out of it), but if the 102 QC issues can get under control, I'd try one as long as I can get a full refund if it's a POS that doesn't work out of the box. No interest in spending more of my own money to make it work, or sending it back to get one that might.
 
Wildey said:
The 2nd gen rifles are going to be better quality and worth the wait IMO.
Click to expand...


You realize that BCL (NEA) has been making rifles and parts for a few years right? This isn't their first kick at the cat and they've been plagued with QC issues since day one. There is a reason that NEA isn't the most popular AR in Canada right now. They've always been at a good price point allowing the guys on a budget into the game, the problem has always been that they make a good product that is brought down to something less desirable than a Norinco because of poor workmanship and letting the customer be the QC department. Warranty has always been exceptional as well yet they are not a very popular rifle. Now all of a sudden because there is a non restricted FRT everyone has forgotten their history.

Oh wait, you must be in for round two pre-order, yes I'm sure that all of a sudden they will turn it all around and all rifles from now on will be fantastic.

I hope you're right but I'm putting my money on them being more of the same but now with the ambi controls added there will be more stuff for them to screw up and not function correctly.
 
chrisward3 said:
Do you mean 4” or 4’ (48”)? If it’s the latter, that would make it a 7-8moa rifle with handloads...
Click to expand...

If you want to know what type of accuracy to expect look here. Just because someone says handloads doesn't mean anything unless they developed those loads for that rifle and know what they're doing behind the trigger.

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...Load-tuning-for-BCL-102-started-testing-BCL-2

Medium contour, fluting, and "match" chamber do not add up to a match grade barrel, these rifles suffer from stringing as they warm up just like most cheap barrels do. I'm ok with that, I would have preferred a lighter barrel and skip their so called match chamber in favor of a reliable rifle that would feed any ammo though.
 
cr5 said:
Funny that most of the guys with them either say mine works so they're great yet they completely ignore the reports from other owners who have issues or they just completely accept the rifle is a piece of crap and plan to replace every piece possible right from the start without using the manufacturer's warranty.
Click to expand...
like with any other new rifle, People flat out lie because they don't want to admit to buying a lemon and/or plan to sell it down the road.

I have seen this a number of different times with new rifles, when at the rage the owner is cursing the issues, Online it is awesome. These people know who they are.
 
cr5 said:
You realize that BCL (NEA) has been making rifles and parts for a few years right? This isn't their first kick at the cat and they've been plagued with QC issues since day one. There is a reason that NEA isn't the most popular AR in Canada right now. They've always been at a good price point allowing the guys on a budget into the game, the problem has always been that they make a good product that is brought down to something less desirable than a Norinco because of poor workmanship and letting the customer be the QC department. Warranty has always been exceptional as well yet they are not a very popular rifle. Now all of a sudden because there is a non restricted FRT everyone has forgotten their history.

Oh wait, you must be in for round two pre-order, yes I'm sure that all of a sudden they will turn it all around and all rifles from now on will be fantastic.

I hope you're right but I'm putting my money on them being more of the same but now with the ambi controls added there will be more stuff for them to screw up and not function correctly.
Click to expand...

You do know that BCL/NEA has not been making BCL 102 for years?
 
Brian46 said:
Is a 102 identical to a 25?
Click to expand...

No, but it's close enough and they've been building AR's long enough that they should know that the inside of a bolt carrier should be polished smooth where the gas rings ride.
The point is that they've been doing this long enough and had their reputation tarnished enough times that there should be no surprises when a customer buys a new rifle from them. They need to learn from their past experiences and fix the problem in their shop that is allowing their reputation to be drug deeper through the mud.

andrew3081 said:
You do know that BCL/NEA has not been making BCL 102 for years?
Click to expand...

You realize that a direct impingement rifle is nothing new and is something that they have been making for years?
Call it an AR-15, AR-10, BCL-102, or NEA-25 they are all built in a similar manner with similar tools in the same shop and everything that comes from that shop seems to be plagued with issues that should have been caught before being sent to the consumer.
Just because this is a new version of the same thing they've been building for years does not mean that all the manufacturing deficiencies are suddenly ok and to be expected. This rifle along with a name chage to BCL was their chance to shake off the old reputation and start fresh but so far it seems they are blowing it and making the same crap they made before only now they are charging $500 more for it because it comes with a NR FRT.

I think the rifle has a lot of potential and I would like to own one some day but until they sort out their QC issues I'm content to play with the toys I already have and let others struggle to get this rifle to work reliably, and if making it work reliably means changing out the barrel and BCG I'll just stick to my Modern Hunter that works and is already accurate. I want the 102 for a utility rifle, I don't care if it's sub moa, I just want it to run 100% the way the manufacturer builds it without having to pay for two trips back for warranty before I get what I paid for.
 
Last edited:
Is my 102 perfect, no. Did I send it out for warranty work twice, yes. Would I buy one again, HELL YEA!! It's an amazing tinker rifle.

Mine currently sports a 6.5cr match barrel, triggertech trigger, and a whack of other AR10 parts. Swapping barrels is a breeze (takes standard off the shelf DPMS barrels). Mine and my friends (he also converted his to 6.5cr) shoots sub MOA at 100 all day long.

Rifle is backed by a lifetime warranty backed by SFRC (Ryan stands by this product).

I can't wait to get another upper and have one in 243 soon.

BRKdgZh.jpg
 
cr5 said:
Funny that most of the guys with them either say mine works so they're great yet they completely ignore the reports from other owners who have issues or they just completely accept the rifle is a piece of crap and plan to replace every piece possible right from the start without using the manufacturer's warranty.

You're right and I've been giving the same advice, rather than replace everything yourself if you get a rifle that has issues every owner should be contacting BCL and (politely) asking them to correct every issue until it's running reliably. Then if you want to change things go for it and enjoy the modularity of the AR platform but no one should be paying $1750 plus tax and accepting anything but a rifle that functions 100%.
I don't expect sub moa accuracy from a cheap factory barrel but I do expect every rifle to work.

Your worst case scenario of selling it isn't that great, if you have a rifle that doesn't function it will be pretty hard to sell.

BCL/NEA should be paying shipping both directions for warranty work on their rifles. It would be different if it was one rifle out of one hundred with issues but this is much worse and the customer shouldn't have to pay when there is a known QC issue with the company.




To me I would think it either means BCL/NEA does a better job on QC with exports than they do for domestic sales or the guys over in NZ are more like our more adventurous members who instead of complaining just accept it's a base to build off of and fix it themselves.


The rifle has the potential to be a great rifle that everyone who likes these type rifles would love to have in their collection but BCL really needs to step up their game and make sure every rifle that makes it to the customer works as advertised. If they don't and there continues to be a high failure rate it won't take much more than batch number two for everyone to move on and the 102 and BCL will be history in Canada. NEA had a horrible reputation and they lost a lot of sales because of it and so far it seems like it was simply a name change and nothing else.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%, I for one have or am in the process of sending my rifle back to BCL/NEA for a second time. Both of which were on my dime (which is total BS IMO). So far I'm into it for an extra $110 for shipping to Ontario. The rifle has potential, but there are a few things that have to change right off the bat. The first thing, is that they have to get their QA/QC department in order. The money that they would spend on a person/s would pay back ten fold later with regards to their reputation and product being lesser than Norinco. The second big thing is, as mentioned, is he match chamber. The rifle is advertised as being 7.62 X 51. To be honest, it does not like 7.62 ammo (or at least mine didn't). The rifle is more of a hand load semi auto rifle. Other things that are minor is the fit and finish of some of their parts are poor with sharp edges and ergonomically poor. BCL/NEA would be better off being like the rest of the AR-15 world and buy in bulk and out source their small bit, like CC, Colt USA, and other. There is no sense in re-inventing the wheel on this and use proven suppliers for the small bits, and focus on their QA/QC.

Finally, on a personal thought, from what I have been seeing here on this forum, I think almost $1800 CAD for a upper and lower receiver is a bit steep; as there are a lot of people who are changing out every piece of this rifle other than the upper and lower. Too bad they would not sell just the upper and lower for a reasonable price... then this would be palatable.

I want this to be a success, but I have started to to second guess my decision to buy a 102 and whether or not to keep it once it returns from the factory or preserver and put a jack load of cash into it to make it a reliable and semi decent shooter, but that will cost extra money. The biggest thing being the reliability.
 
shatthatkilledelvis said:
I haven't been able to find out 100% as there isn't much info on the web other than a few vids, but from what I gather it's built on a proprietary shortened upper/lower. If the upper doesn't bolt up and fire on a standard a10 lower, than there is a chance it might go NR.
Click to expand...

I've been oggling their MSR10 even though I thought it was restricted, if it gets classed NR that'd be a game changer for me personally.
 
im waiting for my rifle and see how she goes with the changed parts I have ordered, if its still an issue it is going to get a normal “not match” criterion barrel in 308
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom