NEA-15 after 400 Rounds Fired **Pic Heavy**

Runningfool said:
IMGP3776.jpg
Click to expand...

You were right about the colours appearing off, not including the addons i see at least 5 different shades :p. I've seen them in person, they are indeed black, its jsut interesting how the lighting makes them all funky coloured
 
Denich said:
You were right about the colours appearing off, not including the addons i see at least 5 different shades :p. I've seen them in person, they are indeed black, its jsut interesting how the lighting makes them all funky coloured
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was too late last night to retake the shots and frig with the WB settings on my camera, try different lighting, etc.
 
easy said:
The heavier weight of an M16 carrier is rather important in a short pistol barreled AR to achieve correct timing.

Many people have issues running short barrels 100% reliably. It all starts with a correctly sized gas port hole relative to barrel length, closely followed by carrier and buffer weight.
Click to expand...

0.2-0.3oz isn't going to make a difference in a rifle, short barrel or not.

It is curious though that they advertise FA carriers yet some are getting semi.
 
For one thing, that OP's bolt is unmistakable IMHO. CMT - I'm sure of it.

The other bolt with the cursive "L" I have no idea of. We do know NEA bought sub-contracted bolts from a variety of sources before they started making carries in-house.

The staking issue is not as big a deal as people make it out to be. Frankly, a screw torqued to specification isn't likely to come loose at all, the staking is just insurance. Provided the displaced metal contacts and slightly plastically decor's the socket-head cap screw, it will serve.

Anecdotally, I've heard of US inspectors not accepting bolts because too much metal was displaced when staking - but I suspect that is not the norm.
 
Leg said:
0.2-0.3oz isn't going to make a difference in a rifle, short barrel or not.

It is curious though that they advertise FA carriers yet some are getting semi.
Click to expand...

Nooo... the weight difference between an M16 carrier and an enhanced style carrier is closer to a whole ounce.

The weight difference between a standard carbine buffer and an H buffer is also close to one ounce.
 
^Agreed! Quality pics are hugely important when the customer can't actually pick up the product. I don't know why so many manufacturers and dealers have been so slow to pick this up.
 
easy said:
Nooo... the weight difference between an M16 carrier and an enhanced style carrier is closer to a whole ounce.

The weight difference between a standard carbine buffer and an H buffer is also close to one ounce.
Click to expand...


From what I read these are the weights of common BCG

Colt & LMT M16 auto BCG : 9.5 oz
CMT & LMT AR-15 semi-auto BCG : 9.2 oz **** type shown****
Colt AR-15 semi-auto "C" open bottom - unshrouded firing pin: 8.6 oz

so the 0.2-0.3oz is accurate.

granted this is from the internet so YMMV.
 
Tiwaz said:
From what I read these are the weights of common BCG

Colt & LMT M16 auto BCG : 9.5 oz
CMT & LMT AR-15 semi-auto BCG : 9.2 oz **** type shown****
Colt AR-15 semi-auto "C" open bottom - unshrouded firing pin: 8.6 oz

so the 0.2-0.3oz is accurate.

granted this is from the internet so YMMV.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the internet. I guess I'm going to have to weight them and get back to you.
 
That gun came from me. I'm pretty sure at the time I wasn't advertising FA BCG's in any NEA guns.

Ryan

Tiwaz said:
Either way the carrier that is shown doesn't meet the advertised spec. It would be good for NEA to clarify this.
Click to expand...
 
Chemist said:
That gun came from me. I'm pretty sure at the time I wasn't advertising FA BCG's in any NEA guns.
Ryan
Click to expand...
Did you specify SA BCGs in your description Ryan? I honestly didn't pay much attention to the specs you listed when I ordered through you - I knew they were NEA-15s so I consulted NEA's specs to get it right from the horse's mouth so to speak. If NEA has been advertising their ARs as having FA BCGs since day one but providing dealers and therefore consumers with SA BCGs then, like Tiwaz said, it might be good for NEA to clarify this.

In light of the mixed BCG sourcing and confusion in the past few months, as a consumer I am left to wonder if there was a mix-up in BCGs and I received the wrong one or if it was an advertising goof on NEA's part in that they were not delivering what they had advertised. Either way, it might be nice to know.
 
I'll make sure it gets updated on our website but I think everything from this point will be FA anyway. About 40 SA carriers went out in our earlier guns. I'd never really thought about the SA/FA thing to be honest.

Ryan
 
chemo said:
you may want to contact NEA for a replacement of that BCG asap.
Click to expand...

Why? Please explain...
That is a FA isn't it? If it's not, what do you look for?
and it is counter staked... sooo what's wrong with this BCG so we all know what to look for in the future...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom