I was trying to order a holster and was told that the rail on the 226 MK 25 is different from the rail on the Sig Legion 226 sao. Is this correct? If not, are the pistols pretty much identical? I have looked at pictures of each and they sure look alike to me.

The rail on the Mk25 is picatinny rail.
The one on the Legion is SIG rail. Its surface is slightly curved.


Picatinny rail

---

SIG rail

If putting a light on, the sig rail is not square. I have found a workaround by a thin rubber slip between the light and rail. It seems to keep it square enough for what I need.

Why sig continues to use an out of spec rail is beyond me. Mk25 is the best pistol they make.

quote:

Originally posted by sg:
Why sig continues to use an out of spec rail is beyond me. Mk25 is the best pistol they make.

That's pretty much how I feel as well. The pic rail on my Mk25 is a great base for accessories to grab onto. Meanwhile I've tried a number of lights and lasers on my P229R and P226Rs over the years and found that not all of them clamped down properly, presumably due to the shape of that insipid curved rail. But attach any one of those accessories to a M1913 spec rail? GTG. SIG should've by now chosen that its alloy frames be Picatinny or have no rail at all. Hell, even the bloody poly P320 uses a proper M1913 profile rail.

Yep, continuing to use the SIG rail is idiotic.

quote:

Originally posted by sg:
Why sig continues to use an out of spec rail is beyond me. Mk25 is the best pistol they make.

When the various gun manufacturers first introduced accessory rail equipped handguns, there was no industry standard and several of them, including SIG, introduced proprietary rails. The problem with the proprietary rails was that it caused problems for accessory manufactures (Streamlight, Insight, holster makers etc...) to create accessories compatible with the different rail systems, and early on they either had to make model specific accessories or offer various rail adapters.

After a few years many gun manufacturers moved toward standardization by adopting the mil-spec Picatinny rail, but SIG stayed with their proprietary rails, and I believe this was a branding decision.

Only a few years later, when SIG introduced their first rail model in the competition for a new military handgun (P220 Combat) they wisely designed the rail to mil-spec, and even after the military decided against adopting it and SIG offered them to the public, they kept the mil-spec rail.

SIG has included the mil-spec Picatinny rail on only a few models, but when they have they note the rail in their promotional material, and I believe they treat it as an "upgrade" or "deluxe" desirable feature as a selling point...which requires that they have a "base model" feature of the non mil-spec proprietary rail in their line-up as well.

Early on, when rails were first introduced, I could understand SIG using a proprietary rail, but with a commonly accepted standard in the industry today, and manufacturing standards and efficiencies, it just seems like SIG's continued use of their proprietary rail design is an example of archaic thinking and marketing trumping a standard functional design.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage
SIG has included the mil-spec Picatinny rail on only a few models, but when they have they note the rail in their promotional material, and I believe they treat it as an "upgrade" or "deluxe" desirable feature as a selling point...which requires that they have a "base model" feature of the non mil-spec proprietary rail in their line-up as well.

Early on, when rails were first introduced, I could understand SIG using a proprietary rail, but with a commonly accepted standard in the industry today, and manufacturing standards and efficiencies, it just seems like SIG's continued use of their proprietary rail design is an example of archaic thinking and marketing trumping a standard functional design.

The one thing I’ve never liked about the Legion line is that they didn’t include the 1913 rail especially, to your point, since Sig market’s it as upgraded feature.

quote:

Originally posted by mcs1564:
The one thing I’ve never liked about the Legion line is that they didn’t include the 1913 rail especially, to your point, since Sig market’s it as upgraded feature.

Yeah, that crossed my mind as well. SIG seems to reserve the 1913 rail "upgrade" for their ' .mil' type guns.

Hmm, that brings up a question...which rail does SIG use on their 1911 guns? I've only shot one SIG 1911, years ago, and I don't recall it having a rail.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
Yeah, that crossed my mind as well. SIG seems to reserve the 1913 rail "upgrade" for their ' .mil' type guns.

Hmm, that brings up a question...which rail does SIG use on their 1911 guns? I've only shot one SIG 1911, years ago, and I don't recall it having a rail.

Based on a quick look at some pics, it appears to be of a 1913 shape.

The 1911 rail is picatinny, at least mine is. No idea about the really early GSRs and the like.

FWIW, if you're actually trying to use the rail for what it's intended for--mounting a light--the SIG rail works just fine. A Surefire X300U-B will work just fine on my Legion SAO, 220 SAO, 1911 tacops and 320s.

I guess this thread is about holster tolerances when the light's not mounted, but if you actually put a light on there, it should obviate any issues.

I haven't experienced any issues with a TLR1 on the Sig proprietary rail.