Magmatic-hydrothermal tungsten deposits in China are mainly hosted within or around the Yanshanian granitic plutons in the Nanling Range. Actually the ore-forming ages of these tungsten deposits are very difficult to be precisely determined, resulting in two periods of tungsten mineralization in statistics: 150–160 Ma (primary ore-forming period) and 130–140 Ma (second ore-forming period), this puzzles understanding of tungsten mineralization and its relationship with granite in the Nanling Range. This paper will analyze the recent documents in tectonic, petrolographic, geochemical and geochronological domains, and discuss on parental rocks, deep-seated magma chamber and ore-forming mechanism to provide some positive estimations relative to metallogenic model of the tungsten mineralization in the Nanling Range: (1) The early Yanshanian biotite monzogranites occurred as batholith or stock could not be parental rocks to tungsten deposits in the Nanling Range, thus the ore-forming ages of 150–160 Ma are open to doubt; (2) The late Yanshanian two-mica/muscovite alkali-feldspar granites occurred as stock, boss and vein are potential providers of tungsten source, but not parental rocks to tungsten deposits in the Nanling Range due to their too small volume; (3) When combining main intrusion (biotite monzogranite), subsequent intrusion (two-mica/muscovite alkali-feldspar granites) and tungsten deposit as a whole, a new metallogenic model could be established: the residual magma enriched in ore-forming materials (tungsten, fluxing components, and aqueous fluid) could occur in a long-lived magma chamber, which intruded rapidly in the extensional system and splitted into two portions (i.e. fluid–melt immiscibility): an alkaline and silicious fluid and a strongly felsic melt. The fluid portion ascended quicker in the top of extensional system and formed as the wolframite-bearing quartz vein, whereas the melt portion arrived later and filled the bottom of extensional system and solidified as the two-mica/muscovite alkali-feldspar granites; (4) Therefore, the two-mica/muscovite alkali-feldspar granites and tungsten deposits with the same ages (i.e., 130–140 Ma) are a couple of congenetic subaspects, their synchronous occurrence showing a complete ore-forming process with “source–transport–precipitation” of ore-forming materials. The understanding in this paper not only could explain the magmatic-hydrothermal deposit-related geological phenomena (e.g., “small pluton and large deposit”), but also renews the theory of magmatic-hydrothermal mineralization, more importantly it provides a clear guidance of the exploration of this type of deposits in future.