So how do the NEA Ar's shoot
- Thread starter marks 36 hamon
- Start date
- Location
- victoria bc
Phew phew. Something like that...
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6449419#post6449419
Barrel is an advanced form of nitrating.
Barrel is an advanced form of nitrating.
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario
cptseawolf
CGN Regular
- Location
- Saskatchewan
dunno....im still waiting for my ATT. Mine probably wont get shot til the spring.
It also says the 25yrd shooting was to sight in the irons and try the Lucid.
There were some 100 yard groups also mentioned.
There's also this: http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=671142
It was a decent overview but not exactly a Peter G. Kokalis piece of writing.
One of the things that strikes me as particularly odd in this article is why would NEA assemble a parts gun from blemmished (possibly out of spec.?) components to be sent out for review? Were they so ambivalent that they simply didn't care? I'm at a total loss here to understand their motivations for doing so. Anyone reading this article would have reservations about owning their product after reading this.
While it might seem "macho" to say that you only care about function and not form, why would anyone put good money out for poor workmanship? I don't care how inexpensive this rifle is or wether it's Canadian made or not. My money is going to be spent where I can get the best value per dollar spent.
I've taken an interest in NEA's up-comming PDW but I think I'm going to hold off for at least a year after it's been introduced. At that point, perhaps they'll have their QC issues sorted out and their fit & finish will be a little more refined than what it is at this point.
North Eastern Arms
Manufacturer-Business Member
... Earls gun was sent in as a working trial gun to be run into the ground. We didn't know he was going to do a review of this type as well. As such he requested for us to not waste 'A' parts but that he was fine with blems for his testing. But when we heard of this review we still said go ahead and not to pull his punches. Earl did just that. I regret that there were QC issues in addition, they have been addressed.
where the rifle is at in its development, i feel it did does fine. still some issues here and there. that will go with out saying for any name in the buisness. this has been a reoccuring topic of conversation in many threads here. what i feel needs to happen is we need to see some serious groups made at the mid range lvl with the most popular thus far the 14.5". although some will argue the groupings of cirtain individuals, sights.....whatever. That shouldnt take away the integredy of the rifle persay. once i get mine ill know for sure. until then all I can do is speculate and keep reading. I do however, like the fact that its Canadain and support it, I think we need to see more of it. I also believe there is a place for NEA in the black rifle market. Is a hard game to get into and only time will tell but im looking forward to getting mine in as are many other im sure.
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario
Let me give a bit of background, I received this gun right out of the box and with the irons mounted on it.
Anyone who knows how to sight an AR would sight it at 25 to get it on paper and then see how it shoots at 100. Read the Marine Corps M16 armourers manual and you will see that is exactly what they do.
So, I sighted the irons and Lucid at 25 then at 100 as per any reasonable firearms test.
As to a blemished gun. I think that anyone who can read between the lines could see that I accepted a gun that was an NEA "second". I believed that it was more important that customers get their guns rather than a tester receive a gun before a customer.
Jeff and Dave did not know I would put an article out. They knew I was talking about one and they both asked for my candid feedback. They, and the Canadian shooting, public got it.
As to the comment about not writing like Peter Kokalis... You're comparing me to him? Awesome!!! I'll buy you a beer! I grew up on his writing and welcome your comparison! I've mostly written police reports regarding everything from assaults to robberies to ###ual assaults to threat assessments and many use of force lesson plans (###ual assaults and threat assessement investigations were my specialities). I've also written many techincal and R&D reports but they were internal and very detailed. Any criticisms that you guys have I'll actually listen to and will accept. I would like to start writing more.
As to QC issues, I've talked extensively with Jeff and Dave at NEA and they will be or already have addressed these issues. I was an operator and instructor and I do know what works.
Last edited:
