NEA 25, Non rest 308

robab said:
Anything new on this or can anyone from NEA on here comment ? I'm planning a 308 purchase within next year and would like to know
Click to expand...

If you need/want a .308 calibre rifle I would just go ahead and buy one now. Only God knows when/if the RCMP will finalize their classification of this (assuming they can be persuaded its a NR rifle) and then you may wish to wait to see what the Hive Mind at CGN and other fora think of it through actual use given the colourful history that NEA has had with QC problems.

I know I would be pretty leery of buying a first generation NEA rifle, but that's my opinion and worth what you paid for it.
 
84wh1 said:
The gun is already classed as restricted. It's an AR10. From my understanding, NEA is trying to convince the RCMP to reclassify the AR-10........we know how this is going to go
Click to expand...

The argument they are making is that the original AR10 design predates the AR15, therefore it is not possible for the original AR10 to be a variant of the AR15, as it came first.
Most .308 AR's are up scaled AR15's (SR25(10+15=25))making them a variant and are technically not an AR10 but an AR15 variant. That brings us back to a rifle built on the original AR10 design that predates the AR15 would technically not be a variant, and thus not restricted pending it meets the other requirements for NR status.
 
Last edited:
saitek11 said:
The argument they are making is that the original AR10 design predates the AR15, therefore it is not possible for the original AR10 to be a variant of the AR15, as it came first.
Most .308 AR's are up scaled AR15's (SR25(10+15=25))making them a variant and are technically not an AR10 but an AR15 variant. That brings us back to a rifle built on the original AR10 design that predates the AR15 would technically not be a variant, and thus not restricted pending it meets the other requirements for NR status.
Click to expand...

So what differentiates an "original design" AR10 from an AR15? Cocking handle attached to the top of the bolt? Non removable carry handle?
 
BioPace said:
So what differentiates an "original design" AR10 from an AR15? Cocking handle attached to the top of the bolt? Non removable carry handle?
Click to expand...

The upper and lower of identical design to the orginal AR10 that predated the AR15. It will not fit AR15 uppers/lowers. I do that specifically have possession on the design, but carry handles and charging handles won't make a difference. It depends on the actual upper and lower receiver.
 
Original Farirchild AR-10 - notice the charging handle location

805c3097d36dcf05ba7c4f8c8adc4f0e.jpg
 
saitek11 said:
The argument they are making is that the original AR10 design predates the AR15, therefore it is not possible for the original AR10 to be a variant of the AR15, as it came first.
Most .308 AR's are up scaled AR15's (SR25(10+15=25))making them a variant and are technically not an AR10 but an AR15 variant. That brings us back to a rifle built on the original AR10 design that predates the AR15 would technically not be a variant, and thus not restricted pending it meets the other requirements for NR status.
Click to expand...

well, here is to hoping that they are good salemen because as it stands now, the rifle is restricted
 
fenceline said:
Which is on the unregulated upper receiver. How is the lower different on a pre ar15 AR10... and an AR10 deemed by the lab to be an AR15 variant?
Click to expand...

Clearly no one knows. Which is about par for the course with Canadian firearms regs I guess. I wonder if the lab even knows?
 
Actually, and someone with an FRT could confirm this, there are a couple of examples of non-restricted AR-10's out in Canada, I believe. They are originals from way back, possibly prototypes?

Maybe this was just CGN hearsay but I know I heard someone say it on the internet.... gotta be true right?

Someone able to look it up?
 
krprice84 said:
Actually, and someone with an FRT could confirm this, there are a couple of examples of non-restricted AR-10's out in Canada, I believe. They are originals from way back, possibly prototypes?

Maybe this was just CGN hearsay but I know I heard someone say it on the internet.... gotta be true right?

Someone able to look it up?
Click to expand...

Hear say thereally were a few, no one knows where they are or if they have been sold out of country. The are as seen in the pics of CTCS' though. Must be a early first design, lower does appear to be similar if not identical AR10''s.
 
onetwentyish said:
Hear say thereally were a few, no one knows where they are or if they have been sold out of country. The are as seen in the pics of CTCS' though. Must be a early first design, lower does appear to be similar if not identical AR10''s.
Click to expand...

I'm not totally sure if that was the one or not, but yea, it appears it might be.

And my understanding was they were still in country as of a year or two ago anyways. Held by a couple of collectors.

And the lower was supposedly similar but not the same - not compatible. The gas system was different as was the bolt etc. It was a markedly different firearm afaik.

Also, there was a shotgun (can't recall the name right now) that was reclassified by the RCMP from restricted to non-restricted because it was found to be a variant of the original AR-10 design. That lends a lot of credence to the theory that there are certainly NR versions of the original AR-10
 
krprice84 said:
Actually, and someone with an FRT could confirm this, there are a couple of examples of non-restricted AR-10's out in Canada, I believe. They are originals from way back, possibly prototypes?
Maybe this was just CGN hearsay but I know I heard someone say it on the internet.... gotta be true right?
Someone able to look it up?
Click to expand...

The 4 semi-auto AR10 survival rifles used by KLM airlines where sold in Canada in the 1970's by Lever Arms. At one time 3 of these were owned by a Canadian dealer in Surrey, BC. While no detailed photos exist, it is very likely that these rifles would not be legal as semi's in the US due to the presence of a completed sear hole. However, the selector is marked safe and semi so the rifle was intended by the factory to be semi-auto. The Surrey dealer attempted for several years to sell his 3 KLM rifles to various US and Dutch parties willing to pay his high price.

Below is a factory semi-auto AR10 (not a KLM rifle) that I recently found for sale in the US. It was imported from Canada and is not legal in the US due to the sear hole. There were several semi-auto variants made and only one, the AR102 Sporter is legal in the US.

Of course I could not buy the rifle.
28w1jbm.jpg
 
Last edited:
HHollow said:
The 4 semi-auto AR10 survival rifles used by KLM airlines where sold in Canada in the 1970's by Lever Arms. At one time 3 of these were owned by a Canadian dealer in Surrey, BC. While no detailed photos exist, it is very likely that these rifles would not be legal as semi's in the US due to the presence of a completed sear hole. However, the selector is marked safe and semi so the rifle was intended by the factory to be semi-auto. The Surrey dealer attempted for several years to sell his 3 KLM rifles to various US and Dutch parties willing to pay his high price.

Below is a factory semi-auto AR10 (not a KLM rifle) that I recently found for sale in the US. It was imported from Canada and is not legal in the US due to the sear hole. There were several semi-auto variants made and only one, the AR102 Sporter is legal in the US.

Of course I could not buy the rifle.

ehccyg.jpg
Click to expand...

Very interesting info.... one question... if it wasn't legal in the US due to the sear hole, how is it for sale in the US?

Or is it considered a machine gun and an NFA registered gun?

Also, do you know if those 4 rifles that were sold in Canada are the ones that retained non-restricted status when the various governments decided upon creating the stupidest laws they could possibly come up with?
 
krprice84 said:
Very interesting info.... one question... if it wasn't legal in the US due to the sear hole, how is it for sale in the US?
Or is it considered a machine gun and an NFA registered gun?
Also, do you know if those 4 rifles that were sold in Canada are the ones that retained non-restricted status when the various governments decided upon creating the stupidest laws they could possibly come up with?
Click to expand...

The rifle was offered privately. The owner was aware that a public sale would have been difficult.

I believe it was not legally imported, or that it was allowed passage by a sleepy border agent. Due to the sear hole the thing would be considered by atf to be an unregistered machinegun regardless of how it was imported.

Besides the KLM rifles, there are/were other semi-auto AR10's in Canada including one AR102 sporter.

Also, would a Dutch AR10 built on a US-made semi-auto lower be non-restricted? I know of at least one Canadian who bought such a rifle and imported it from the US into Canada. He used a Washington state name and address to take delivery. I have no idea how the import was accomplished.

Below is a photo of what the selector area looks like on an AR102 Sporter. Note the following features:
1. sear block by means of an oversized steel pin
2. fences to keep the selector within a 90 degree arc

Earlier versions has "SAFE" and "FIRE" markings in addition to the green and red dots.

zllk7.jpg
 
Last edited:
fenceline said:
Which is on the unregulated upper receiver. How is the lower different on a pre ar15 AR10... and an AR10 deemed by the lab to be an AR15 variant?
Click to expand...

An original AR10 has a full diameter bolt carrier and a substantially larger diameter receiver extension (buffer tube).

The primary difference of an SR25/AR10B "AR10" is that the bolt carrier has a reduced diameter tail section which enables it to use an AR15 receiver extention (buffer tube).

That is the primary design difference, early original AR10s used a gas port from the side of the barrel, later original AR10 rifles used a top gas port similar to current.
 
Lee Enfield said:
An original AR10 has a full diameter bolt carrier and a substantially larger diameter receiver extension (buffer tube).

The primary difference of an SR25/AR10B "AR10" is that the bolt carrier has a reduced diameter tail section which enables it to use an AR15 receiver extention (buffer tube).

That is the primary design difference, early original AR10s used a gas port from the side of the barrel, later original AR10 rifles used a top gas port similar to current.
Click to expand...

Ok. So effectively nothing. Operates the same way but doesn't follow a "milspec" definition the current AR10 does. And even then ar10 designs fluctuate in minor details.

An old ar10 is just as different from an AR15 as a current ar10 is.

And the ar10 came before the ar15. And the lab has even stated in frt entries that the ar10 is not a regulate design like the ar15.

Buffer tube sizes, gas port orientation and charging handle locations have nothing to do with the basics of the design. Minor variations. Not significant to the overall system.

The ar10 came before the ar15. You can't be a variant of something that came after you. It's a one way street.

And lately the lab has been having a way of going back on things they used to state they fixed on.
 
I keep typing in " NEA 25 " in google for any tid bits of info on this firearm. Every now and then small bits of info are released. Here's hoping.
 
Epoxy7 said:
I keep typing in " NEA 25 " in google for any tid bits of info on this firearm. Every now and then small bits of info are released. Here's hoping.
Click to expand...

Same. I was leaning towards picking a SCAR up but if these are released as NR, $1500, and available "soon".. I'm in!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom