Violations of the Picatinny rail Mil-STD 1913

    Håkan Spuhr, owner of Spuhr shared this on Facebook and Instagram and it’s worth considering:

    “Top is NATO drawing of Stanag 4694, the back compatible replacement for Picatinny Mil-std 1913.
    Lower is one “so called picatinny” and there is a lot of those violations of standard out there.
    To put it simple, cross slots should be minimum 5.23mm and square in bottom and there should be 10mm C-C betwen them.
    If there not is that, it’s not a Picatinny, and not a NATO rail either!
    And it does matter if God’s own Armoury have produced the rail, it’s simply wrong!

     

    SPUHR-FACEBOOK

    Picatinny Rail – Standard versus Reality.

    For more information and facts, check out Wikipedia on the Picatinny Rail.

    For instance, did you know this? “The rail is named after the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, USA. The Picatinny Arsenal’s role with the rail was to test/evaluate it and to create a military standard for it. This was Mil-STD-1913, dated February 3, 1995

    And the NATO Accessory Rail STANAG 4694.

    “According to the NATO Army Armaments Group the differences between the MIL-STD 1913 Picatinny rail and the STANAG 4694 are:

    • A metric reference drawing.
    • Additional new measurements and tolerances.
    • Adjustments of some measurements.
    • Reduction of straightness tolerances with approximately 50%.”

    Below: Håkan Spuhr at IWA in Germany 2016.

    Håkan Spuhr

    The obvious questions is – what violations are out there? Which are the worst?

    Eric B

    Ex-Arctic Ranger. Competitive practical shooter and hunter with a European focus. Always ready to increase my collection of modern semi-automatics, optics and sound suppressors. TCCC Certified medic.


    Advertisement