Winchester 12 and 1200 Shotgun

S

Shooterdude

Inactive
Can the trigger be held back and use the pump to fire the 1200 like you do the 12...any other aspects differ from the Model 12 to the 1200..all input is helpful..Thank You The Shooterdude
 
No. As I understand it, the 1200 was designed from the outset with a disconnector.

Mine, an early 1970s made one, has a disconnector.
 
The Model 12 and the 1200 are two totally different guns working in a different manor.
The only thing they have in common is they are both pump guns.
 
"The Model 12 and the 1200 are two totally different guns working in a different manor.
The only thing they have in common is they are both pump guns."

They're working in a big house staffed by servants? Nice! :D

The Model 12 is a sweet shotgun, absolutely no doubt about that, and a lot of people have mourned its passing by heaping anger on the 1200.

I think that's really misplaced. Yes, the 1200 suffers in comparison, but on the whole, the 1200 is a pretty decent shotgun.

I've been very happy with mine over the years.
 
The 1200 is an adequate shotgun, the model 12 is an excellent shotgun, IMHO.

back in the 70s the Army used the 1200. The Marines used the Rem 870. In this case, the Marines were smarter.

I had to repair 3 model 1200s one summer, in my small arms shop in Germany (78). All three had broken triggerguards.

Rather unusual, considering that, at the time, the only thing these guns were used for was guard duty at ammo dumps.
 
"Rather unusual, considering that, at the time, the only thing these guns were used for was guard duty at ammo dumps."

Actually, not unusual at all.

The trigger guard was a know weakspot. It was an aluminum casting, and was very prone to fracturing when the gun was dropped.

Your boys were clumsy.
 
The Model 12 was revered. The Model 1200 was reviled. In trying to reduce costs Winchester went more than a bridge too far. They went too light and with the wrong materials on several parts. It was replaced by the Model 1300, which was replaced by the Speed Pump, which was replaced by the Turkish made under FN auspices SXP. Maybe they finally got it now.
 
I personally think that the 1200 was reviled for the same reasons that the post 1964 Model 70 and post 1964 1894 were reviled -- because they were different.

Granted, the 1200 was a LOT more different than either the 70 or the 1894...

I'm quite fond of my 1200. Not shot it in quite a few years, but I'm quite fond of it.

The 1200 also had some interesting design aspects to it, including the rotary bolt that locked into the barrel extension, making it far stronger than other shotguns, and the immediate-release action, making cycling it faster than most contemporary shotguns.
 
Last edited:
The trigger guard was a know weakspot. It was an aluminum casting, and was very prone to fracturing when the gun was dropped.

Your boys were clumsy.
Click to expand...

Actually, only one of the three was. That one had the center (flat bottom) section of the trigger guard broken out.

The other two were failures of the aluminum casting. The little "wall" that holds the end of the spring leg that puts tension on the safety button had broken. This meant that there was no tension on the safety. One gun would let the safety button slide freely back and forth if the gun was tipped to one side or the other.

The other gun let the safety button fall out when the gun was tipped on its side.

And yes, the boys ARE clumsy. I think the most often damaged weapon I saw in those days was the Browning M2HB. Bent/broken rear sight ears were most common, followed by broken charging handle assy. One time, they actually broke the upper spade grip frame.

It was somewhat understandable though. M2s were constantly being mounted and dismounted on the tracks. It rains a lot in Germany. Tired guys, and a slippery wet 80lb chunk of steel (over 100lbs if the barrel is still in it) hoisted up and down off the top of armored vehicles....you can see how that happens.
 
I can certainly attest to breaking parts on an M-2. Those things are friggin heavy, and it always seems like that is the last thing you have to do before getting released for the weekend.

Un bolt it, lower it off the top of the Brad, lug it to the cleaning barrel, disassemble, clean, reassemble, lug it to the arms room, stand in line, and then finally dismissal.
 
"The other two were failures of the aluminum casting. The little "wall" that holds the end of the spring leg that puts tension on the safety button had broken. This meant that there was no tension on the safety. One gun would let the safety button slide freely back and forth if the gun was tipped to one side or the other."

Yep, apparently also possible from being dropped. That area of the casting was extremely thing and apparently had a lot of locked in stress.
 
I belonged to a Winchester Gun Club back when the 1200/1400s came out. They rented guns if you wanted to rent one. A friend worked there. They had a cardboard 55 gallon drum in back. When it got full of broken guns they would seal it up and send it back to Winchester for repairs. It filled up amazingly quickly. They also had a few O/Us. I think only one of them ever had to go back for anything if I remember right.
I was selling guns and after a few multiple go rounds I would not order any more of them. The 1300 was not perfect but it was a big improvement.
 
Oh there's no doubt about it that the 1200s were not nearly as durable, but it was truly a case of the overall design being generally good, but the execution being flawed.

We've got to remember that the 1200 was a totally new design (unlike the 70 and the 1894, which were redesigns), and it was designed to a price point, in large part using what was for Winchester entirely new manufacturing concepts.

I think in a lot of ways what Remington is going through right now with the R51 is very similar to what Winchester went through with the 1200.
 
Mike as you say "price point", I wonder how much the 1200 actually cost to make? Can not be much as the Winchester engineers were given the task of making a shotgun with the least amount of cost involved.

I do have to say this the Model 12 at the end of production was costing Winchester more to make than they were charging for it. After all with all the fitting involved it took a gunsmith to make one, not a assembler on a production line!
 
My 1967 Gun Digest shows the model 1200 field model going for $99.95

and the Model 12 Super Pigeon Pump gun for $825.00

In todays dollars that comes out to $712.95 and "ouch" $5884.92.

Browning made a production run of Model 12's, they must of lost their shirt on that one!
 
Browning did okay on their Model 12 reproductions. The charged a fair profit, and the workmanship was good, and they employed modern manufacturing methods to cut costs. And they sold them all without a fire sale.
 
No doubt about it, the Model 12 is a nice shotgun! I like them enough to use it as my screen name. Here is mine:

M12_riot_gun.jpg


It's an M12 riot gun, complete with a WW2 era shotgun ammo pouch and some modern Winchester #1 buckshot shells. These M12 riot guns were used by the U.S. military for guarding airfields, depots, bases, and so on. The versions with bayonet lug, sling and heat shield where generally knows as "trench guns." They were used to great effect in close-quarters fighting, especially in the war against Japan.

Oh, and yes, you can empty one in a hurry by holding down the trigger and shucking that pump like there's no tomorrow!

I don't have any experience with the Model 1200... have no interest in them considering I have the best pump shotgun ever made, and I'm not the only one who thinks that way about these old warhorses. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top