"1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
- zhivago
- Mods
- Posts: 21926
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:18 am
- Location: London, UK
"1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
Resident Spartan.
- StevenO
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 17768
- Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:06 pm
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
Oh wow, I love that blue.
What colour would that be?
What colour would that be?
- Naturality
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1670
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:03 am
- Location: Over There, look! >>>
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
It's nice but 1969?! Wave The Fish!
The tremolo is bent too
- fullerplast
- Mods
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:53 am
- Location: In My Room
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
I think it's called Krylon Medium Blue.... at a Wal-Mart store near YOU!What colour would that be?
Q. Are we not men?
- StevenO
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 17768
- Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:06 pm
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
I'm painting my 58' jm that colour.
- geoffreysnow
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:24 pm
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
That looks like a krylon blue metalic job i did a long time ago. except i polished mine out
- RumorsOFsurF
- Mods
- Posts: 17598
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:55 pm
- Location: Oregon
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
That sure doesn't look like a vintage bridge cover. :-\
Damn kids, get off my lawn!
- Jay
- Admin
- Posts: 7718
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:01 pm
- Location: Santa Ana, CA
- Contact:
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
This looks a lot like a guitar I recall seeing on the Hoboken Vintage website last spring.
- Soiouz
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
What makes you think it's not vintage? It looks very legit to me (small flaps, size, etc.).RumorsOFsurF wrote: That sure doesn't look like a vintage bridge cover. :-\
The whole guitar looks more like a 1959 or 1960 to me: amber switch tip, bakelite knobs, single line under "Fender" on the headstock, dots, etc.
That, I think, would be consistent with 1959 too, as they were all unique. I've seen many other trem arms bent that way.Naturality wrote:
The tremolo is bent too
Last edited by Soiouz on Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Naturality
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1670
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:03 am
- Location: Over There, look! >>>
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
I suppose it could have been restored after a bad life or something. Probably some repro partsSoiouz wrote: The whole guitar looks more like a 1959 or 1960 to me: amber switch tip, bakelite knobs, single line under "Fender" on the headstock, dots, etc.
- mezcalhead
- Admin
- Posts: 11566
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:18 am
- Location: Swampland
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
I dunno about "probably" .. I guess it could well have some repro parts but impossible to tell one way or another from that photo. Zhiv's original point is that it doesn't have the features you'd expect from a '69, as Soiuz says.
The trem arms were hand made from a length of metal, so the bends and lengths varied depending on how the guy bending it felt that day. That shape doesn't look a million miles away from the arm on my '59, although as far as I know you can't date offsets by arm shape.
The trem arms were hand made from a length of metal, so the bends and lengths varied depending on how the guy bending it felt that day. That shape doesn't look a million miles away from the arm on my '59, although as far as I know you can't date offsets by arm shape.
Distance-crunching honcho with echo unit.
- luau
- Admin
- Posts: 10019
- Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:07 am
- Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
Too bad this was probably a '6' instead of '5' typo. I'm sure the owner is aware of what he has given the rest of his stock. I'd love to have a refin '59 for a refin '69 price just the same though.
Bigger in sum than parts.
- Naturality
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1670
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:03 am
- Location: Over There, look! >>>
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
So, the big question. Who's gonna phone him for a price?
- luau
- Admin
- Posts: 10019
- Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:07 am
- Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
Bigger in sum than parts.
- Soiouz
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Re: "1969??....I don't think so, Gary"
Of course you're right. But, I just noticed that the vast majority of times when I see a trem arm bent like that, it belongs to an early offset.mezcalhead wrote: as far as I know you can't date offsets by arm shape.