Norc CQ M4 vs NEA AR-15

I love my NEA. I have one of the first batch 14.5" model, and it runs flawlessly. I've put about 1000 rounds through it now, and the trigger feels better than it did on day 1. I had a small issue with my cycling in the first 40 rounds, but they completely replaced the upper within a week and it's been perfect ever since.

That being said, I've now ordered a new complete ATRS AR-15, and I'll probably be putting the NEA on the EE or selling it to one of my friends. It was a great introduction into the AR platform and I couldn't be happier, I just want something customized to what I'm now looking for.
 
novan3 said:
His indifference to both brand clearly makes him neutral & unbiased. Why else?
Click to expand...

Have you actually read any of his posts? Indifferent and unbiased are not words I would use to describe him. I don't mean that in a negative way either. Everyone should be entitled to their opinions and beliefs.
 
Just received my Norc M4 I bought used a few days ago and the first thing I tried was the trigger at 6.5 lbs with a gritty takeup/creep and the hammer pin walking out.
Pulled it all apart and found the trigger sear to be not square with the hammer.
Stoned the hammer hook and polished it leaving the angle the same.
Next I milled the trigger sear square, slightly decreased the angle where it still had positive engagement and polished it. Now it has less takeup and a very smooth 3.75 lbs. break. Made sure the pins and springs were installed properly and no more walking.

All the stock trigger parts were made to work perfectly to me. Can't see investing any more money for triggers. Love the ambi safety/mag release. Something you don't see on higher priced AR's.
I replaced the cheap butt stock with a Magpul CTR, the grip with a MOE+ for more comfort. I'll probably make my own muzzle brake and cost will be a 2" piece of stainless. I see no advantage in changing the handquard or gas block/front sight as I don't need any rails and accuracy probably won't make any difference.
All together we're up to $700 total for gun and parts, ready for CQB.

The NEA would cost me still another $500 taxes in and I'd still need to make some mods to it like the Norc. Just need to work up some good loads and zero it.
YMMV
 
You guys are on the wrong track, this is how you make a VS. thread:p

Norinco AR

Barrel 10.5
Twist 1in9
Free float NO
Gas system DI
Ambi Dextrous YES
Heavy Barrel NO
Coating NO
Picatinny Rails NO
Warranty (5 years?)
Price New 699.99$

NEA CQB

Barrel 10.5
Twist 1in7
Free float YES
Gas system DI
Ambi Dextrous NO
Heavy Barrel YES
Coating YES (dragon skin)
Picatinny rails YES
Warranty Lifetime
Price New 994.99$

This here is the main differences between both rifles. I believe that both guns can be accurate but not with the same ammunition, the NEA is best used with heavy bullets like 62gr to 75gr. As for the norc it should group better with 55gr to 65gr. As for the finish on the rifles, norincos are really rough, NEA are suppose to have a better overall finish.

In the end, buy whatever you please but keep in mind that if you want to buy an AR that you will keep for a long time perhaps the NEA would be a bette choice because of its warranty.:ar15:
 
Very detailed but a bit off the subject..

Multicamguy said:
Looking to get into the budget AR category, bang for the buck I know both are winners, my concern is accuracy?

Is the Norc is as accurate as the NEA for $400 more?
Click to expand...

kouik said:
You guys are on the wrong track, this is how you make a VS. thread:p

Norinco AR

Barrel 10.5
Twist 1in9
Free float NO
Gas system DI
Ambi Dextrous YES
Heavy Barrel NO
Coating NO
Picatinny Rails NO
Warranty (5 years?)
Price New 699.99$

NEA CQB

Barrel 10.5
Twist 1in7
Free float YES
Gas system DI
Ambi Dextrous NO
Heavy Barrel YES
Coating YES (dragon skin)
Picatinny rails YES
Warranty Lifetime
Price New 994.99$

This here is the main differences between both rifles. I believe that both guns can be accurate but not with the same ammunition, the NEA is best used with heavy bullets like 62gr to 75gr. As for the norc it should group better with 55gr to 65gr. As for the finish on the rifles, norincos are really rough, NEA are suppose to have a better overall finish.

In the end, buy whatever you please but keep in mind that if you want to buy an AR that you will keep for a long time perhaps the NEA would be a bette choice because of its warranty.:ar15:
Click to expand...
 
Airborn_69 said:
Very detailed but a bit off the subject..
Click to expand...

How can it be off subject, The name of the thread is NEA-15 VS Norc CQ?!?
The author of this thread wants to know which is better. The awnser is none. Both rifles have Pros and Cons. But ultimately the important thing is that both guns are made differently so it makes it hard to tell which is better.

I don't know maybe its off subject but I failed to see how.:confused:
 
kouik said:
How can it be off subject, The name of the thread is NEA-15 VS Norc CQ?!?
The author of this thread wants to know which is better. The awnser is none. Both rifles have Pros and Cons. But ultimately the important thing is that both guns are made differently so it makes it hard to tell which is better.

I don't know maybe its off subject but I failed to see how.:confused:
Click to expand...

He wants to know which is better not only for quality but you've failed to see the main subject.. Accuracy.

Thats what the guy really wants to know.
 
There is no such thing as a free float AR.

Norc have less quality control issues right now but you won't have much customer service unless you buy from marstar.

Norc are tack drivers in my experience, NEA are probably just as good.

I made this same choice last year, I went with the Norc and spend the price difference on ammo and Magpul goodies. I am more than happy with my decision.
 
c0ntract said:
There is no such thing as a free float AR.
Click to expand...
That's true as the gas tube is still bound to gas block and receiver. Besides accuracy won't make any real world difference with M4 carbine length barrels with either forend. Since I'll be using a single point sling I won't be pulling on the barrel to make any POI changes with an Aimpoint scope.
For long range and benchrest shooting I can see an advantage with a FF tube with heavy match barrels, match ammo and target scope, but then I'd pick a well made bolt action for that.
 
Due to the difference in twist ratio between the NEA and the Norc barrel, it makes all the difference in long distance accuracy, I believe that the NEA would have a better success at stabilizing heavy bullets than the Norc.
 
kouik said:
Due to the difference in twist ratio between the NEA and the Norc barrel, it makes all the difference in long distance accuracy, I believe that the NEA would have a better success at stabilizing heavy bullets than the Norc.
Click to expand...

I agree that the 1:7 would be better at longer distances if you're using match ammo but again Multicamguy is asking one on one comparison in MOA accuracy with the same ammo, likely milsurp 62 gr. If its a tie game, for the difference in $$ the Norc would be the winner since its almost half the price of the other competitor

I enjoy listening to theory's of which, what & how but neither of us here have seen a one on one comaprison at 100m of the 2.

Personally Multicamguy: Get an NEA complete lower and buy a Norc CQ-A upper and you have a winner..
Click to expand...

My 2 cents since I'm not a newbie on here ;)
 
kouik said:
Due to the difference in twist ratio between the NEA and the Norc barrel, it makes all the difference in long distance accuracy, I believe that the NEA would have a better success at stabilizing heavy bullets than the Norc.
Click to expand...
True, but not required in a carbine barrel and only workable with handloads, but if that's important to someone, give 'er.
TBH, I'd sooner install a stainless match 14.5" barrel, Wylde chamber and 1-8" twist and now the price of the Norc equals the NEA with a better barrel.
The NEA and Norc barrels will always be 5.56 chambered, military 2 MOA spec'd barrels.
It's fun to toss this around. :)
 
I'd go for the NEA. Made in Canada!

I'd also get a Norc later, because why the hell not? More AR's in civvie hands = a good thing.

Also, I was not making a "Chinese guns suck" comment, I was just saying that Made in Canada has more appeal to me, considering it's not too much more expensive. I love my Norcs, though!
 
My opinion and a short answer OP:

In the 10.5" and 14.5" lengths of barrel buy a Norc because the NEA probably won't shoot so much better at short ranges with a short barrel that it is worth paying $400 more for the NEA.

In the 16" plus lengths of barrel buy a NEA because the better fit and finish of the NEA will be worth it on a longer barrel shooting at longer distances.

If you want to compare accuracy of a dozen 14.5" NEA and a dozen 14.5" Norc with milsurp ammo they will probably average the same because the nature of the ammo in any 14.5" barrel at closer ranges (200m or less) will dictate that average in that rifle price range.
 
Ha Ha. me again.
Don't compare the finish with a 7075 forged with a 6061 billet.
6061 basically is the easiest and the least expensive material to machine in terms of machinability and tooling (tool wear) cost.

I always support Canadian made as long as quality up to the standard.
IMO Made In Canada means usually means good quality to me. But unfortunately not "ALWAYS". So please choose wisely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom