Nine's NEA-15 CQB Pic/review thread
- Thread starter Nine
- Start date
Ah yes I forgot, none of the rifles they've built and shipped all over the world work!! It really is amazing how almost every NEA thread turns into a gd goat f**k. If you don't like a particular product then congratulations!!!! There are pleanty of makes of guns I would never purchase but somehow I DON'T feeel the need come onto CGN and tell everybody how crappy thier product is and how much I hate them all!
Nine's been waiting for months for his rifle , comes on here to show it off and there's gotta be some chooch to show up and pi$$ in his cornflakes. And not to my surprise. Well I'm glad to see you got your new toy nine, have fun with it and play safe.
Ohh and I forgot, I'm saying something positive about NEA so I MUST be a effing shill!!! Hahahaha
wow I hope the OP reads through all that crap and read this:
to the OP
what front sight is that? it looks like a magpull gen 2 but it has a white dot? wheres that from, I had to put my own dot on mine
hope you like your new NEA as much as I like mine
to the OP
what front sight is that? it looks like a magpull gen 2 but it has a white dot? wheres that from, I had to put my own dot on mine
hope you like your new NEA as much as I like mine
Runningfool
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Relax a bit bud, you are coming across as foaming at the mouth a bit. You've mentioned your whole "precision machining, toolmaker, precision manufacturing" job 3 times already!
We know that Dweenz, although he just received his rifle recently, got some old stock somehow, we can agree on that right? And if you've been following the NEA threads for the past 8 months you probably are also aware that NEA had an issue with a few charging handles contacting the castle nut. So it would appear to me that it isn't some QC conspiracy, just a regrettable mistake of some old stock getting out.
I don't know about the whole test firing thing, your guess is as good as mine on that. Maybe some of the early rifles got boxed up before test firing, I don't know.
The 3 rifles that you personally inspected and that 2 of the 3 didn't work out of the box, did you discovery why they wouldn't function? Was it a recent batch or an early one? I'm just honestly curious because a 66.6666666% (just being precise
) failure rate as you say seems high.One wouldn't strip rounds from the mag at all the other couldn't be cocked. Don't know if they were old stock or not but It is clear that even a simple function test would have revealed that they were NS. So the logical conclusion is that they were not tested. It is not a conspiracy its laziness or incompetance The fact that these people make aircraft parts is pretty scary.Relax a bit bud, you are coming across as foaming at the mouth a bit. You've mentioned your whole "precision machining, toolmaker, precision manufacturing" job 3 times already!
We know that Dweenz, although he just received his rifle recently, got some old stock somehow, we can agree on that right? And if you've been following the NEA threads for the past 8 months you probably are also aware that NEA had an issue with a few charging handles contacting the castle nut. So it would appear to me that it isn't some QC conspiracy, just a regrettable mistake of some old stock getting out.
I don't know about the whole test firing thing, your guess is as good as mine on that. Maybe some of the early rifles got boxed up before test firing, I don't know.
The 3 rifles that you personally inspected and that 2 of the 3 didn't work out of the box, did you discovery why they wouldn't function? Was it a recent batch or an early one? I'm just honestly curious because a 66.6666666% (just being precise
To the OP, if you like your new rifle thats all that counts. It is funny how any thread with NEA in it goes south pretty fast, why is that? NEA problems started from day 1 they started flogging their wares, not just AR's. If you made a negative comment about any of their products you were branded as a troll or just a hater. Sure they are looking after their customers but their customers are doing NEA's R&D in the field and thats to bad. All the other AR issues and now the fit and finish, were does it stop?
I put a Trijicon CP25F front post in my MBUS:
The post threads into the MBUS no problem. It also was held reasonably in place by the spring lock of the original post, but not 100% to my satisfaction. It simply is not quite tall/deep enough to accommodate the two tiered trijicon sight. The post itself has a indent for the plunger, and the top part of the sight can rotate independently to realign when elevation is changed. Because of this, the sight comes with it's own tool and spring lock post(plunger). This plunger does not fit into the magpul sight... without modification. SO, I filed it and cut it like this:
I also swapped out the spring for a trimmed one from a bic lighter.
Turned out pretty good. No other modification was done.
Unregistered_
Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
Sweet mod! Will have to look into doing this myself!
Runningfool
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Sweet! Where did you pick up that front post?
![-[Crosshair]-](/forum/data/avatars/m/31/31565.jpg?1718745216){kind=avatar}
I put a Trijicon CP25F front post in my MBUS:
The post threads into the MBUS no problem. It also was held reasonably in place by the spring lock of the original post, but not 100% to my satisfaction. It simply is not quite tall/deep enough to accommodate the two tiered trijicon sight. The post itself has a indent for the plunger, and the top part of the sight can rotate independently to realign when elevation is changed. Because of this, the sight comes with it's own tool and spring lock post(plunger). This plunger does not fit into the magpul sight... without modification. SO, I filed it and cut it like this:
I also swapped out the spring for a trimmed one from a bic lighter.
Turned out pretty good. No other modification was done.
Those are nice sights good for you.
