1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Discussion of vintage Jazzmasters, Jaguars, Bass VIs, Electric XIIs and any other offset-waist instruments.
User avatar
takeittothemall
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:04 am

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by takeittothemall » Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:00 am

I’m firmly in the don’t do it camp. Not because of the loss value. More so because there’s a finite number of vintage Fender guitars out there and I think they are worth preserving. I agree that it’s a rad concept, so a replacement body makes a ton of sense to me.
great OSG deals with: ncarey13, skip.
great TGP deals with: drjoel, 12strings, Tim P, angrybandnerd, echobaseone, guitarpkr67, jcampbell331

User avatar
JSett
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8802
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Old Hampshire, Old England

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by JSett » Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:57 am

Larry Mal wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:03 am
Don't do it.
For what reasons?
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Larry Mal » Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:44 am

johnnysomersett wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:57 am
Larry Mal wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:03 am
Don't do it.
For what reasons?
Well, I am a person who has a Jaguar from the same year as yours, and it has been routed out for hum buckers. It fucking sucks. I will at some point clean up the routes and make it be a real Jaguar again. But it'll never be the thing it was supposed to have been.

I try to preserve the past, that's just kind of my outlook on things.

Besides, if you really want a Jaguar body that is routed out for wide range hum buckers, why don't you just have one of those made for you? I think we all know that wood is wood when it comes to guitars, it's not like your 1967 Jaguar body is going to sound any different than a brand new one would.

The only thing interesting about your older Jag body is its historic value, much of which you will ruin with an unnecessary modification. Just buy a new body, wire that up, and switch the neck back and forth, and that way you have two Jaguars.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
JSett
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8802
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Old Hampshire, Old England

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by JSett » Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:12 am

Larry Mal wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:44 am
johnnysomersett wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:57 am
Larry Mal wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:03 am
Don't do it.
For what reasons?
Well, I am a person who has a Jaguar from the same year as yours, and it has been routed out for hum buckers. It fucking sucks. I will at some point clean up the routes and make it be a real Jaguar again. But it'll never be the thing it was supposed to have been.

I try to preserve the past, that's just kind of my outlook on things.

Besides, if you really want a Jaguar body that is routed out for wide range hum buckers, why don't you just have one of those made for you? I think we all know that wood is wood when it comes to guitars, it's not like your 1967 Jaguar body is going to sound any different than a brand new one would.

The only thing interesting about your older Jag body is its historic value, much of which you will ruin with an unnecessary modification. Just buy a new body, wire that up, and switch the neck back and forth, and that way you have two Jaguars.
See, this is where the difference in perspective and intrinsic value cross paths and can go in different directions.

For instance, about decade ago I used to collect old Datsuns. Over here in the UK they are rare, but mostly unloved compared to their other vintage car brethren (Fords, VWs, Mini Coopers, etc). I managed to secure a particular model that I knew, through official records I had access to, that only approximately 7 existed still in the country. It had cosmetic issues but basically drove and ran fine. I thought nothing of swapping in a more powerful engine, lowering it's suspension, and generally making it 'my own'. I am part of the particular cross-section of car enthusiasts that like to modify and enjoy our cars. Much like people that hotrod old Model A Fords, rather than run them as per Mr Henry Ford's factory spec, do rather regularly. This is because we enjoy them in a particular format that doesn't include them being 'stock'. Sure, it often ruins the historic value but it increases the personal value. Which is more important?

I view my guitars as a consumer and creative, rather than a historian or banker. To me they are a tool above anything else. And thus the issue of personal perspective becomes paramount in objectively approaching a subject such as this.

The supply of everything is finite. And in 60 years likely the 'youth' will be lamenting our generation tearing into J Mascis sigs, modifying AVRIs, et al.

The '64 Mustang I bought recently with Firebird pickups I 100% bought mainly because it had been modified and looked like a cool modified guitar that was my 'cup of tea', and I adore it. If it had been stock, I'd have found it likely underwhelming. You hate the fact your '67 has been routed, but someone like me might see that and be excited by that.

Perspective. It's all about perspective.
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Larry Mal » Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:25 am

johnnysomersett wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:12 am


Perspective. It's all about perspective.
Sure. But you asked other people for their perspective, and so you got mine. I wouldn't do it. Like I say, if I wanted a Jaguar but with WRHB pickups in there, I would just make that. I don't really see the point of hacking into a vintage instrument to get it- you'll reduce the value of the guitar considerably in so doing, so what's the angle? It won't sound any better than a new one, it won't save you any money, and while I can certainly see the point of a historic guitar it throws all that out the window by modifying it in such a way, so that's no longer a factor.

But you've already thought of all of this, anyway. You said you were wrestling with the decision so I came down on the side of you that says it's a bad idea.

In the end, though, it's your guitar, do whatever you want with it. I don't care.

That being said, though, that's not how I feel about things. If I have something that has historic value, like I say, I feel like I am a custodian of it for the future in a lot of ways rather than just an outright owner.

I got my Jaguar from a friend of mine who died. Before he passed, he expressed regret that he had done what he did to the Jaguar, he said he didn't know that it was really worth anything at the time. It was just an old guitar that no one wanted back then.

That certainly happens, but I always try to see the value in old things and not destroy them just for my current amusement is all.

And like I say, if I wanted a Jaguar with hum buckers I could have that made for me all day long. Sure, they won't have any historic value, but neither will yours once you are done with it.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
JSett
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8802
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Old Hampshire, Old England

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by JSett » Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:32 am

Larry Mal wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:25 am
johnnysomersett wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:12 am


Perspective. It's all about perspective.
Sure. But you asked other people for their perspective, and so you got mine.
Yeah, I agree. Dialogue is what I was after. And I appreciate everyone's input on it.

Weirdly, I get very defensive about some old stuff (I am a real stickler for people not messing with old furniture, especially mid-century modern examples).

If this was a less common, and more desirable, guitar (say, a pre-CBS Jaguar in LPB, BMM, etc) then I wouldn't even dream of doing it. But, in the vintage offset world, a CAR CBS Jag isn't short of good examples to keep the history alive.

But, clearly I am biased and trying to rationalise my plan, so everything I say on the matter is objectively fallible
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Larry Mal » Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:02 pm

You know, I decided to test my assumption, and went to Warmoth:

https://warmoth.com/index.php/jaguar-body-builder

So as you can see they use a default route that will accommodate Jaguar or hum bucker pickups, but I don't think from looking at that how one would be able to use a Wide Range Humbucker.

Firebird pickups would be no problem, but the WRHB might not fit.

Probably some other builders would be able to do this no problem, but maybe it would be more work than I had thought.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
Zeus
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:27 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Zeus » Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:21 pm

takeittothemall wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:00 am
I’m firmly in the don’t do it camp. Not because of the loss value. More so because there’s a finite number of vintage Fender guitars out there and I think they are worth preserving. I agree that it’s a rad concept, so a replacement body makes a ton of sense to me.
This is my view too.

And I think unmodified CBS-era custom colour Jaguars are just as worthy of preserving as other examples.

I sold my own sunburst 1966 Jaguar last year, partly because the neck was uncomfortably thin and partly because I felt guilty about doing even reversible mods, like a Staytrem bridge or Mastery tremolo. The Jag was virtually mint and it made me feel like I owned a museum piece, not a useable instrument.

User avatar
sumlin
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:09 pm

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by sumlin » Mon Sep 20, 2021 2:15 am

johnnysomersett wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 11:12 am

I view my guitars as a consumer and creative, rather than a historian or banker. To me they are a tool above anything else.
No one spends over 3k on a tool. If you're going to modify something then buy cheap to begin with so you're not paying a premium for scarcity and originality. But it's your cash and your guitar.

User avatar
JSett
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8802
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Old Hampshire, Old England

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by JSett » Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:17 am

sumlin wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 2:15 am

No one spends over 3k on a tool.
You ever seen the price of tractors? 😂
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?

User avatar
sumlin
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:09 pm

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by sumlin » Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:36 am

It's like seeing a photo of someone in 1968 and they're wearing shorts made out of a cut-off pair of Levis and thinking "they look good!".
So you go out and buy an identical vintage pair of 1968 Levi jeans for a fortune, get them home and cut the legs off them.
There comes a point where - if you just want something as a tool - you just go and buy a pair of shorts surely? Cut out the middle man and the expense.

But, that said, I hack guitars about all the time so...

User avatar
Tiny C
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:19 am

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Tiny C » Thu Oct 21, 2021 8:26 am

Did you take the plunge yet? FWIW, I say do whatever will make you want to play it. It's your guitar, and if routing it for WRHBs will help you enjoy it more, then you should do it! It would be a shame to spend all that money on a guitar, only to have it sit in a case because it doesn't inspire you.

User avatar
JSett
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8802
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Old Hampshire, Old England

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by JSett » Thu Oct 21, 2021 9:01 am

Tiny C wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 8:26 am
Did you take the plunge yet? FWIW, I say do whatever will make you want to play it. It's your guitar, and if routing it for WRHBs will help you enjoy it more, then you should do it! It would be a shame to spend all that money on a guitar, only to have it sit in a case because it doesn't inspire you.
I decided against it and ordered myself an old AV65 to do the mods to. Came out pretty good but I think I'll leave this one as-is
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?

User avatar
Highnumbers
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 1:21 am
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: 1967 Jaguar, Candy Apple Red

Post by Highnumbers » Fri Oct 22, 2021 10:56 am

Glad to hear that - the number of unmodified 60s Jaguars is smaller than it should be, and it would be unfortunate to add another one that list. These guitars will outlive us all, if properly cared for.

Post Reply