Nea 102

There actually are very early version AR10s that are non restricted and there is/was one in Calgary AB. I happen to know this because I was a friend of a lawyer who defended the owner when the police seized it. He successfully proved it was not an AR15 variant and the fellow got his AR10 back. They are just exceptionally rare here.

If that were true, then all AR-10 rifles would be non-restricted...
 
AR-10s were prohibited because they are essentially all converted autos. The 102 was approved because it was deemed to be based on the very rare semi auto AR-10 variant.
 
Will put my retro pay aside for when IOP and reviews start pouring in to get a sweet (hopefully) hunting rifle

Need to stock up on XCR-M magazines now :p
 
There actually are very early version AR10s that are non restricted and there is/was one in Calgary AB. I happen to know this because I was a friend of a lawyer who defended the owner when the police seized it. He successfully proved it was not an AR15 variant and the fellow got his AR10 back. They are just exceptionally rare here.

And that rifle was never added into the frt. NEA presented the ar10klm and ar102 designs for classification. When those were published they proceeded onto their own build for classification.
 
I get that, however there are AR-10 rifles in Canada that are not AR-308 rifles, and yet they are still restricted. That being said, no-one ever said the RCMP ever made logical decisions on these matters....

Then a push should be made on those models. The akdal 1919 shotgun was changed from being an ar15 variant and the frt for it even cites that it is more related to the ar10 platform and that platform is not regulated restricted by oic like the AR15 is. The lab''s own words in the frt.

The lab is very much aware that the ar10 is not regulated by oic restriction.
 
So this means that anyone can make AR102 clones now as non-res rifles.

I foresee another Canadian manufacturer jumping in since this might possibly cut into their sales of another line of rifles...
 
The lab is very much aware that the ar10 is not regulated by oic restriction.

I was trying to find out why my SR-25 is restricted, and it seems to be because it is considered a variant of the AR15. But as far as I can tell, the AR10 predates the AR15. My head always starts to hurt when I research Canadian gun control, and I'm not sure I have all the details right.
 
The SR25 is essentially a scaled up AR15. It was designed to use as many AR15 parts as possible.

The original AR10, while similar, is not the same design. The trigger mech for example has more in common with a FAL than an AR15. Not a single component from an original AR10 is interchangeable with an AR15. The confusion lies with the fact that most modern .308 ARs are commonly called AR10s when they are in fact not.
 
So this means that anyone can make AR102 clones now as non-res rifles.

I foresee another Canadian manufacturer jumping in since this might possibly cut into their sales of another line of rifles...

I very highly doubt that will happen, I could see them claiming that their particular design is better before jumping on this band wagon.

You underestimate the stubbornness of that "other Canadian manufacturer".
 
Last edited:
The SR25 is essentially a scaled up AR15. It was designed to use as many AR15 parts as possible.

I think of the SR-25 as an improvement on the AR-10, that happens to have some parts commonality with an AR-15. Variant of AR-10, in other words. But I guess the beauty of the term "variant" is that it can mean whatever the Man wants it to. They should just call my rifle "double plus ungood" and then everyone would understand.
 
I think of the SR-25 as an improvement on the AR-10, that happens to have some parts commonality with an AR-15. Variant of AR-10, in other words. But I guess the beauty of the term "variant" is that it can mean whatever the Man wants it to. They should just call my rifle "double plus ungood" and then everyone would understand.

When the builders of the sr25 spoke of their design as a scaled up ar15 in 308... it kind of defines it.
 
When the builders of the sr25 spoke of their design as a scaled up ar15 in 308... it kind of defines it.

That view seems not widely held. Here is what Chris Bartocci had to say:

The great weapons designer, Eugene Stoner, never stopped working on his AR-10 design. He, along with C. Reed Knight of Knight’s Manufacturing, perfected the AR-10 and added many design features of the M16A2, to build the SR25 (Stoner Rifle Model 25). The model number comes from adding the 10 from the AR-10 and the 15 from the AR-15.

In any case, this is not the place for further discussion. I am happy with my SR-25 and I will not be buying this new NEA product, but I wish NEA and all the dealers much success.
 
That view seems not widely held. Here is what Chris Bartocci had to say:

In any case, this is not the place for further discussion. I am happy with my SR-25 and I will not be buying this new NEA product, but I wish NEA and all the dealers much success.

"The great weapons designer, Eugene Stoner, never stopped working on his AR-10 design. He, along with C. Reed Knight of Knight’s Manufacturing, perfected the AR-10 and added many design features of the M16A2, to build the SR25 (Stoner Rifle Model 25). The model number comes from adding the 10 from the AR-10 and the 15 from the AR-15. "

Ah, so it is an evolution of the original AR10, and the later AR15, making the SR25. As in the AR15 and AR10 design being combined to foster a newly named variant of the two.

That's the point I'm trying to make. Bartocci's quote highlights the very issue at hand, as viewed by the lab.

The NEA102 ignores the AR15, sticking to the AR102/AR10KLM heritage, and developing along those lines.
 
Hopefully when enough are in circulation, the NR status will assist with people joining Service Rifle with the ORA.

There "may" be some interesting barrel profiles coming soon. ��
 
Back
Top Bottom