One of our employee's will do anything for a discount or a trip to Shot Show
LOADER?? IS THAT U!
NEA-15 First Official Picture Release
- Thread starter Enfield
- Start date
LOADER?? IS THAT U!
- Location
- East ontario
reallly thats kind of sad.....One of our employee's will do anything for a discount or a trip to Shot Show
My wifes old boss got a tat with the owner of her company on her leg.
she got fired last month, i laughed so hard i allmosy puked
reallly thats kind of sad.....
My wifes old boss got a tat with the owner of her company on her leg.
she got fired last month, i laughed so hard i allmosy puked
Too each there own I guess.........but c'mon
of the actual AR15's that are for sale of course.......
- Location
- East ontario
I was....counted twice.. lol thats why I posted I was envious of the large mags earlier
nice gif
- Location
- Stouffville, ON
Come by today and try the NEA platforms and as an extra bonus????
I don't think he was asking you to "downgrade" or compromise at all. He asked about stainless which obviously you won't be offering based on your reply. I don't see how inquiring about a different twist rate would be downgrading. I find it interesting that your barrel profiles are set up for a front handguard retainer yet a standard FSB with retainer doesn't appear to be an option? I'm sure the barrels you do offer will sell like hotcakes based on the price alone and you do have to start somewhere but offering a few options down the road would be nice. I personally won't buy a barrel unless I can get it with an A2 FSB however given the pics on the site these days I'm obviously in the minority. A 16" midlength would be nice as well.
- Location
- Stouffville, ON
LOADER?? IS THAT U!
Please be serious LOADER'S thighs aren't that large and muscular even
cptseawolf
CGN Regular
- Location
- Saskatchewan
couple pics I took today at TSC:
* yes they are just quick cell phone pics, sorry i couldn't organize a professional to follow me today lol
* yes they are just quick cell phone pics, sorry i couldn't organize a professional to follow me today
lol
Ditto! Seemed like a nice piece, though the trigger was pretty heavy and none too smooth.
I got to meet Jeff today and look at the NEA rifle. From my preliminary inspection it is a very attractive rifle. The tooling marks are a little to obvious in some spots but for the money you pay it's a great looking, well built rifle. Once my ATRS stuff sells I think I'll order one directly from NEA.
I think you should sell me that complete rifle you had on the counter today Jeff, I'll take good care of it. I go to a nice private range and I'll get it good and hot and help prove you have an excellent product!
I think you should sell me that complete rifle you had on the counter today Jeff, I'll take good care of it. I go to a nice private range and I'll get it good and hot and help prove you have an excellent product!
A good looking rifle indeed. However, i am very curious as to the decision behind using the much weaker alloy 6061 instead of the MIL-spec and Industry standard 7075.
Looking at the datasheets for 6061 and 7075 it is quite apparent that 7075 has far superior and more desirable properties including a much higher resistance to flex (elastic deformation), permanent deformation or shearing. It has a s**t ton more tensile strength that makes it almost indestructible when compared to the 6061.
The only two reasons I can think of the reasons for using 6061 is that it is much cheaper to buy and a little easier to work with (are you forging ?) due to it's easy going properties. But as a metal, I am very apprehensive about it's resistance to the cyclic forces it will be exposed to in a firearm. Do you have any academic research that indicates the suitability of 6061 for this application as I fear we are being introduced to a much weaker and much faster wearing firearm - an understandable cause for concern. Now if this was a non-critical component, I would give a damn what metal was used
Ofcourse, I would welcome an opportunity to hear the analysis behind your reasoning.
Looking at the datasheets for 6061 and 7075 it is quite apparent that 7075 has far superior and more desirable properties including a much higher resistance to flex (elastic deformation), permanent deformation or shearing. It has a s**t ton more tensile strength that makes it almost indestructible when compared to the 6061.
The only two reasons I can think of the reasons for using 6061 is that it is much cheaper to buy and a little easier to work with (are you forging ?) due to it's easy going properties. But as a metal, I am very apprehensive about it's resistance to the cyclic forces it will be exposed to in a firearm. Do you have any academic research that indicates the suitability of 6061 for this application as I fear we are being introduced to a much weaker and much faster wearing firearm - an understandable cause for concern. Now if this was a non-critical component, I would give a damn what metal was used
Ofcourse, I would welcome an opportunity to hear the analysis behind your reasoning.
North Eastern Arms
Manufacturer-Business Member
A valid question and one that has been adressed many times.
It was chosen because our engineers that develop high-stress aircraft components (including military landing systems) chose it as the best material for the job. Just because something is done one way for a period of time does not mean that it is the only way, and failure to explore other options and heed the advice of experts with much more experience and knowledge than myself would be an error.
Bottom line, there is not enough stress in an AR receiver to warrant it.
We are not anchored to the past, we are looking to move forward.
We're confidant enough with the choice to guarentee the rifle with a lifetime warranty.
But there are two main reasons.. The milspec standard was written quite some time ago and was written to a single product(s) with no scope for deviation. Note; 7075 is easier to forge, and 90%+ receivers are made from several common sources of forgings.
It was chosen because our engineers that develop high-stress aircraft components (including military landing systems) chose it as the best material for the job. Just because something is done one way for a period of time does not mean that it is the only way, and failure to explore other options and heed the advice of experts with much more experience and knowledge than myself would be an error.
Bottom line, there is not enough stress in an AR receiver to warrant it.
We are not anchored to the past, we are looking to move forward.
We're confidant enough with the choice to guarentee the rifle with a lifetime warranty.
But there are two main reasons.. The milspec standard was written quite some time ago and was written to a single product(s) with no scope for deviation. Note; 7075 is easier to forge, and 90%+ receivers are made from several common sources of forgings.
