Have sitting here an early Browning O/U 12, Belgium made, SN 14173, appears to be an early 1930's make. Aside from being made in the first couple years, any redeeming qualities of the early mfg? Gun is in good condition. Does not have vent or solid rib. Matt pattern on barrel top with funky front sight. Manual safety. 3" chambers as noted on barrel. Appears to be a grade 1, as #1 stamped on barrel flat or whatever it's called on an O/U. What did they call this O/U, a Superposed?? Never did understand what that meant either. At a gun show years ago, I witnessed a gun dealer who sat fondling an early Browning he just bought from some unsuspecting soul and was so enamored with it as he chirped about the recoil function setting the hammer for the second shot. Is this a function to be so cherished? This gun does have ejectors as it seems to chuck the hulls 5 corn rows over. Any thoughts appreciated. RMC
RMC,
I can help you with the superposed question. Simply that one barrel is positioned above the other as opposed to barrels beside each other, side by side or juxtiposed(sic?).
Inertia triggers, certainly adequate. Nothing to chirp over. Some of the early Browning superposed had a double/single feature. The gun could be fired as a tradtional double trigger or a single trigger.
Someone will be along and will know a lot more than I.
Chief
As Chief pointed out, "superposed" simply means one barrel on top of the other. Browning happened to adopt the word as the name of their OU's. But in fact, all OU's are superposed.
I had a Laurona OU with the double/single (or twin single) triggers. Pull the front one, lower barrel fires first; pull again, upper barrel fires. Reverse for the rear trigger. Or just use as a DT. Interesting concept.
If it has no rib and just a matted barrel...
With a front sight on a small block/ramp...
It's one of the first Lightning models.
(inertia single trigger is no biggie)
an pre war superposed have a fit, finish, look and balance that is unlike the post war guns...sadly, many of the people who created these fine guns were lost in the war...their gun making skills have never been replicated.
Based on the serial number your gun was made in the late 30's, probably about 1938. Ribs were optional on most prewar superposeds, even though few were sold without a rib. The solid rib was only about a $2 charge, so most guns were ordered with solid ribs. If your gun has the same style fore end as the post war guns (not the metal "horseshoe" retainer) then it is virtually identical with the very early post war guns.
I think most would say the high point of superposed quality was in the late 1950's, not the pre war guns.
The 3" chambers on your gun are unusual if they were done at the factory. Very few 3" guns were sold, and they were a special order item, or could be added if a 2 3/4 gun was returned to the factory. I have looked at quite a few prewar guns, own several, and have not seen one that appeared to be chambered to 3" at the factory.
The thing to check would be to see if the Belgian Proof Marks reflect the 3-inch chambers. I can't imagine shooting the 1 3/8 ounce high velocity or 1 5/8 ounce Magnum 3-inch 12-gauge shells of the late 1930s in a Lightning!! Looking carefully through my 1938 Browning Arms Co. paper I don't see anything about 3-inch chambers. Under Standard Specifications it states "All guns chambered for 2 3/4" shells." The plain matted barrel Lightning was $75.80, solid rib $79.80 and ventilated rib $89.90 in 1938.
You might want to call Browning and ask for the historian, Glenn Jensen, and see what information he has on the gun.
Per the 1936 A&F catalog, a solid rib was an additional $4 on a Superposed Lightning; vent rib was the expensive one at an additional $14.
Schwing, "The Browning Superposed" on page 69 says "The company would rechamber the Superposed for 3" shells". I doubt the guns were returned to Belgium or reproofed. Browning had an extensive facility in the U.S. at the time and I believe that virtually all repairs and modifications were performed at that facility. I agree that recoil in 3" 6 3/4 lb gun would be fierce. However there is no significant increase in pressure with pre war 3" loads, and the stock bedding system of the Superposed is one of the best and resists recoil without splitting for many tens of thousands of rounds in most guns.
Thanks to all for the contribution of info. The promotion piece posted by Researcher is the gun. Only this Lightning weighs 7# 2.8oz. on the digital scale. All else looks the same except for a lousy ill fitted crusty vintage recoil pad placed on to tame the wallop of the 3" mag it's labeled to be able to shoot. RMC
an pre war superposed have a fit, finish, look and balance that is unlike the post war guns...sadly, many of the people who created these fine guns were lost in the war...their gun making skills have never been replicated.
Disagree a bit on the post-war/pre-war quality. As Idahobob says above the high water mark of the Superposed is in the late '50s, not before the war. Older is not always better; the Italian gun trade is a classic example of this, as it's better right now than it's ever been.
A true "Lighning" model will have the all wood forend with no steel cap at the front. We are assuming your gun has the all wood forend with no cap.
Researcher, Thanks for posting the photos. The stamped 3" is still a mystery as to whether it is a Browning mark or a secondary market stamp. Does anyone have a 3" stamp on their Belgium Browning O/U or even on an early Browning 5 auto? When did the Auto 5 come in 3" chambering? RMC
OK, here is a shot.
The Brownings were made in Belguim and have proofmarks.
Please check to see if the 76mm mark is present.
You may have to remove the forearm.
Mike
Removed the forearm. Proof marks did contain an open oval with 12-70 on both barrels were the only numbers present. The 12 being gauge and the 70 maybe 2 ¾ length chamber. Probably not an original 3", but mention was made that Browning had a US service center that would open the chambers on request. As mentioned to Bob and Researcher, the forcing cones seem to rougher than the balance of the chamber as in they were not polished when the chambers were cut. Forcing cones appear to be elongated and not abrupt as I would think they would be.
