Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors M-12 Heavy Duck 2 barrel collectors question

I have come across, and acquired, a new to me Model 12 and do not know how odd or unique this might be. It is a 1958 30" round barrel Heavy Duck with an serial number matching 26" MOD 2-3/4" extra barrel assembly. It's in really nice original condition. Blueing is an honest 97 to 98 percent, both barrel and frame proof marks are perfect. I have collected and shot Model 12-s a long time and just never seen another. Could some of the Winchester experts possibly share knowledge of how unique this might be? Thanks

Far from an expert but I have a small collection of model 12s and two Heavy duck high speed 3" guns. I don't recall seeing one with a matching # 2 3/4" barrel/ mag tube. Sounds interesting

its pretty easy to have an extra bbl extension made and matched for m12's. the fact that the extra bbl is marked 2 3/4" leads me to think it was just made on request by an aftermarket co later on.
I mean seriously, why would someone want a 26" 2 3/4" duck bbl in mod at the time of purchase from the factory?
and in all honesty, I doubt very highly Winchester would let it go out the factory with their name on it for legal reasons.
truth be told, that's a dangerous set up having a 2 3/4" bbl on a 3" mag gun. think it out.
you said proof marks match, what about serial numbers on all 3 pieces?

Both barrels and the frame have matching serial numbers. Both barrels have the correct font and layout for year made. The 26" MOD barrel does not have the second proof mark with "P" as Winchester did when a barrel was sold as a part. Both barrels have single proof mark with the "PW" as it should.

Matching two barrel sets aren’t rare but they weren’t all that common either. It would have been a special order but Winchester would have been happy to do just about anything the customer asked for. If the numbers match and the roll marks are the same font, and the forearms match with similar wear on the metal, it’s very likely that it was a factory job.

It may have been purchased that way or the gun could have been sent back later to have the second barrel fitted to the gun. That was more common than the gun purchased with two barrels originally. If the barrels fit properly and the gun functions correctly, based on the what you’ve described, I’d think it was legit and be happy to have it.

I’d be more suspicious of a gun with ribbed barrels and fancy wood, than plain barrels and field wood. If someone was going to fake something like that, they’d want to make it worth their time.

The one question I’d have about the gun would relate the balance. The stock should have 3/4 of a pound of lead in it to balance the gun due to the increased thickness of the 3 inch barrel. With a shorter and thinner barrel added, it wouldn’t balance or swing right for me. All this said…I’m no expert either!

Don’t let him fool you, as Bob is a Model 12 expert. And I agree with him on the post above, especially his comments on the balance and dynamics of a Model 12 Heavy Duck with a light 26” barrel.

While the factory would provide nearly anything a customer wanted, I have a hard time believing they wouldn’t protest quite a bit over this one. The light barrel combined with the lead-enhanced buttstock would make an almost unshootable combination. A few years back, I had one of these guns rebarreled with a factory 32” 2 3/4” barrel, and it was OK, but I wouldn’t have wanted it lighter or shorter.

Bob is certainly right that no one would counterfeit a field gun; my thought is that the barrel was added later, by the factory or somebody else (a place such as Simmons could replicate the factory stamping of serial number to a “T”).

The stock is the typical build and length for the Heavy Duck. The original pad is slightly flattened from time. I did remove the pad and the lead slug is in place, as it should be.

A question regarding the proof marks. I have been told, and have rarely seen, that the barrels were stamped twice with the "PW" are where the guns were returned to the Winchester factory to be re-barreled. Then barrels that Winchester shipped that were stamped with the "PW" and then a separate "P" inside of an oval were parts barrels that Winchester shipped out to gunsmiths and such to be fitted outside the factory. Is all of this accurate?

Guns that were returned to the factory did not have double/two Winchester Definitive Proof (W over P) stamps on the barrel.
The Oval P stamp indicated that it was a mail order barrel (or receiver) that was fitted outside of the factory.

you guys are focusing on proof marks.
anyone can buy a proof mark striker. they still sell them.
im focusing on the fact that a company like Winchester would NOT endanger an owner by making a 2 3/4" bbl fitted to a 3" mag, and give it their blessing in writing.
I have number-less bbl extensions sitting in my shop for customers wanting new ones to match their receivers. and its not hard (FOR A SMITH) to take a bbl extension off a bbl.
without documentation showing it was done by Winchester it will remain a mystery.
I stand by the fact that it could very easily have been made up with a new bbl extension by anyone.

I’m not focusing on proof marks, was just answering the op’s query if his statement about proofs was accurate.

all it takes is a smith to remove a bbl, put another one on, (the factory proof marked extension,) and it goes out leading owners to think its a front end done by the factory.
my point is, from a collectors point of view....Winchester would never allow a dangerous work request to go out, let alone be accepted.

on the other issue, here is a front end I have in where the owner wants a cyl bbl from an old gun put on his other m12. the serialized extension was removed because he wants matching numbers.
so,,..i bought a new extension (unserialized) im restriking the numbers to match, restriking the proofs with a proof strike bought from brownells, and attaching it.

that's my point. its too easy for any smith worth his weight to change out parts.
bottom line....from a collectors point of view, what he has is not unique and you can put me on record as saying it............its dangerous.

We got that loud and clear!

One barrel says “SUPER SPEED & SUPER X 3 IN”. The other says “2 3/4” CHAM”. I think Winchester would have been satisfied with those instructions.

I agree with Bobmar's assessment and thoughts. Anyone with basic gun knowledge would know that feeding any shotgun with 3" shells when a barrel is clearly marked "2-3/4" CHAM" is potentially dangerous and catastrophic, not ever to be done.

Was the gun originally built with the second barrel assembly when new or sent back a few years later and fitted with the 2-3/4" barrel assembly? I do not know and see either as a possibility. Also agree if the gun was a made up fake, a solid ribbed, checkered stocked variant would have been done. I also agree that the heavier stock would make the gun out of balance and difficult to shoot well. Would have Winchester mentioned this to buyer/owner? I think they would have and mentioned a properly balanced gun always shoots and handles better.

Maybe I am missing something, but I do not see anything dangerous about shooting 2-3/4" shells out of a model 12 Heavy Duck when a properly fitted 2-3/4" barrel assembly has been installed.

Another possibility is a government job done for an employee, “off the clock”. A lot of stuff got through the gates.