Norinco vs. NEA?

[Michaelrp]

Hi guys,

I'm looking at getting my first AR in the next month or so. I am now starting to look at the options I have available. One is the Norinco CQA and the other is a a NEA. I'm looking for a 14.5 inch barrel so as to keep my options open for IPSC (I shoot IDPA at the moment).

What makes a Norinco so cheap, and what makes the NEA R10k more expensive? This won't be a tool used for SD, only for sport shooting.

If I do get the Norinco I'll have a quad rail fitted and the NEA already has one so lets say the price difference is about R8k. I know the Norinco's stock feels very cheap so will swap out with Magpul. How's the NEA's furniture?

Choices choices, please help. Should I get the Norinco and run an ACOG on it, or should I get the NEA and run a Burris 332? How available are NEA's? Anything else I should consider?

[Andycap]

I was also very keen on NEA, but after seeing the new Daniel Defense released at this years shot show, i am leaning towards that.

[Tetelestai]

Consider a Daniel Defense.

Seriously, I was on my way to pay for an NEA and held a DDM4 with a lightweight barrel. Despite incurring a couple months of waiting, I opted for the DDM4.

Curious to see how people feel about the Norincos though. Heck of a lot cheaper. Despite my purchase, I'm not sure the extra expense is warranted.

[Edwill]

Norinco with 10k's worth of ammo!

[DS]

Norinco with 10k's worth of ammo!

That is as valid as saying buy a GWM and R200k of diesel - just does not work like that imo.

[DS]

Re DD and Norinco iro expense - the DD is far superior to the Norinco in the manufacture and finish of ALL the parts that make up the rifle as well as the pedigree of those parts. DD is probably one of the top 6 or 8 out the top tier of all AR rifles made in the world.

Comparing a GWM to a Land Cruiser gives you an idea.

The NEA has imo the positives of not having a fixed front sight and s superior hand guard plus a polygonal rifled nitrided bore and a much better OME stock.

The Norinco is nevertheless a very usable and a durable rifle form what we can gather out of internet reports.

[Edwill]

Re DD and Norinco iro expense - the DD is far superior to the Norinco in the manufacture and finish of ALL the parts that make up the rifle as well as the pedigree of those parts. DD is probably one of the top 6 or 8 out the top tier of all AR rifles made in the world.

Comparing a GWM to a Land Cruiser gives you an idea.

The NEA has imo the positives of not having a fixed front sight and s superior hand guard plus a polygonal rifled nitrided bore and a much better OME stock.

The Norinco is nevertheless a very usable and a durable rifle form what we can gather out of internet reports.

Agree Khumba. However for ME a 25k rifle that sits in the safe cause i can't shoot it is useless. However a 12k rifle with 10k of ammo lets me play. If i had the money, would i buy a NEA or DD, in a HEARTBEAT!

[BigT]

DD

[Tetelestai]

Khumba making me feel good about the money I'm dropping at his place...

That said, I'm truly curious about the actual performance of a Norinco compared to a DD on an empirical level (that's just the engineer in me). Let's say long term tests including evaluation of failure rates during practical use, timed tests by good shooters for a fixed course, longevity of the firearm etc. etc.

I know the DD is a superior product (there's a reason I bought one after all), I just wonder how much practical performance (faster, more reliable, less replacement parts) some R10k+ buys you. There are many considerations though - Considering firearm/parts lifetime (where the DD will likely blow the Norinco out of the water), how many South Africans will actually fire enough ammo that this even enters play? Or that this starts affecting total cost of ownership?

[Michaelrp]

This thread has caused kak: http://www.gunsite.co.za/forums/show...pment-HEADS-UP

What do DD's go for? Ballpark figures are fine...