NEA CCS back to standard M4 stock?

freddyfour

freddyfour

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
208   0   0
Location
Brant County, Ontario
Hey guys, new guy to AR's here. I just traded for a 7.5" NEA with the CCS stock and not sure I like the stock. What do I need to do to switch it back to a regular M4 stock?
 
Never handled an NEA CCS myself, but from the looks of it, you'd need a conventional buffer tube, castle nut and new stock. NEA may require a customer buffer and spring assembly. If so, they would need to be replaced with a standard ar15 setup.

Edit: looks the the CCS uses a buffer assembly that's integrated into the BCG. You'd require a new BCG as well.
 
Last edited:
You don't need a new BCG, just a new bolt carrier.
Plus the buffer, tube, spring, etc. The good news is you should be able to sell/trade your CCS and put money in your pocket after buying the parts you will need. The CCS is a pricey stock.
 
I'm pretty sure the CSS runs its own proprietary bolt carrier group

So you would need
- BCG
- Buffer tube
- Buffer
- Buffer Spring
- Castle Nut
- End plate
- Stock
 
I recently purchased a ccs for a 300BLK build. Bloody thing DOES NOT fit on a Colt Canada lower. Not happy. I would assume the lower is milspec dimensionally. I will now have to try it on my three other lowers (Spikes, PWS, Norinco). Beware before you install one of these.
 
FrankieT said:
I recently purchased a ccs for a 300BLK build. Bloody thing DOES NOT fit on a Colt Canada lower. Not happy. I would assume the lower is milspec dimensionally. I will now have to try it on my three other lowers (Spikes, PWS, Norinco). Beware before you install one of these.
Click to expand...

I've looked into a few different retractable stocks for ARs. It seems all of them have compatibility issues with one or a few brands of lowers.

For example, MVB industries has a compatibiliy issue list for their ARC stock :

Known Compatibility Issues:

Not recommended for use with the .50 Beowulf caliber
LaRue Tactical has a larger than mil-spec buffer extension in the lower receiver that interferes with the ARC Stock rails when attempting to collapse the stock.
CMT Tactical UHP15 has a larger than mil-spec buffer extension in the lower receiver that interferes with the ARC Stock rails when attempting to collapse the stock.
Primary Weapons Systems (PWS) has a reduced diameter bore in the rear of the bolt carrier preventing the installation of the ARC Stock buffer.
San Tan Tactical has built in quick disconnect sling attachment points just behind the takedown pin which block movement of the ARC Stock rails.
LWRC ambidextrous lower has the right side bolt catch located in a position that prevents the ARC Stock from reaching its collapsed position.
Spike’s Tactical ambidextrous billet lower has a right side bolt release lever that extends rearward far enough to prevent the ARC Stock from reaching its collapsed position.
Click to expand...

But NEA should've done its homework and made such a list as well.
 
sewktbk said:
I've looked into a few different retractable stocks for ARs. It seems all of them have compatibility issues with one or a few brands of lowers.

For example, MVB industries has a compatibiliy issue list for their ARC stock :



But NEA should've done its homework and made such a list as well.
Click to expand...

I agree. But it doesn't fit in two separate areas. I specifically bought a colt receiver thinking that it would be as 'milspec' as it gets. I haven't gotten out the calipers yet to measure if the receiver is out of spec, or the CCS is, but I trust the Colt's QC over NEA. If the NEA is out of spec, I will seek a refund. I will not be filing or dremeling my stock or my receiver.
 
daaaamnit, i woulda swapped with you. I also have a 7.5 with standard magpul stock. I just bit it and bought the ccs from sfrc to take advantage of freeship. damn you for not posting 3 days ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom