New Wide Range CuNiFe Pickup Covers vs ‘72 Reissue

[B.T.]

Can anyone verify if the new chrome Fender stamped CuNiFe WRHB pickup covers are the same dimensions and hole locations as the ones found on the 72 Deluxe / Custom reissue HB pickups?

[timtam]

I can only verify that Fender WRHB reissue (bar magnet HB) covers - which you can buy as a part from Fender (0054199049) - fit an original 1970s WRHB. I did that that some years ago, to replace a very worn original WRHB cover when I wanted to put the original WRHB into a much newer looking guitar.

But I have not heard of anyone testing if the new Fender CuNiFe WRHB's cover fits the reissues (or originals), or vice-versa. But I think it's a reasonable assumption that they would. It would be surprising if the outer dimensions varied and so you couldn't retrofit a guitar that came with reissue WRHBs (or originals) with the new CuNiFe ones. And it would also be surprising if the placement of the pole pieces in the bobbins - and therefore the cover holes - did not match up.

There would be some question as to whether the metal composition of the covers is all the same, given the propensity for some cover metals to create more eddy currents/treble losses. AFAIK Fender have not said what the CuNiFe covers are made of, nor did they say what any of the several generations of reissues' covers were made of.

[B.T.]

^Good info, thanks! I didn't think about the cover metallurgy.

My thoughts out of the gate is that Fender probably wouldn't go the extra mile to create a new cover specifically for the CuNiFe unless the pole pieces didn't match up with the bobbin specs etc? But they've done things that I wouldn't have expected and have impressed over the years so anything is possible.

Which brings me back to the pole spacing. So the originals aka vintage pickups must have the same spacing as regular humbuckers but the outer portion of the bobbin is much bigger to accommodate more wire? I say that because the earlier "WRHB" reissues show just a regular Gibson style humbucker under the hood with some type of foam gunk surrounding them to get them snug into the covers.

[timtam]

I checked on my memory of the reissue cover treble loss issue being raised in the GITEC WRHB investigations. They mention Helmuth Lemme's finding that reissue "WRHB" (bar magnet HB) cover metal composition is more magnetic/causes more treble losses (lower Q) than the original covers (but not much detail provided - link below). But it's also never been clear if all of those Fender "WRHB" reissues over the years came from the same Asian pickup factory, so it's unclear if they all had the same components (the current 0054199049 cover is listed as made in Korea). It's anyone's guess as to whether the new Fender CuNiFe WRHB covers match the originals or the reissues' (eg they could be just using the 0054199049 covers).
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... asurements

The bar-magnet "WRHB" reissues had the oversize covers/bases but had regular-HB size bobbins under the hood as you say. True WRHB bobbins are a little bigger and fill the case, but obviously the pole piece locations are driven by the string spacing, so are similar to a regular non-WRHB HB. The new Fender CuNiFe WRHBs have slightly different specified neck and bridge DCRs (the originals were all nominally the same DCR - see blueprint below) but I'm 99% sure there is no difference in pole piece spacing.

The only construction specs I've seen is this blueprint of the original 70s WRHB from the Duchossoir tele book, which doesn't include dimensions (and the copy is as bad in the book as here) ...

[madlovepickups]

The reissue Fender CuNiFe wrhbs have a string spacing of 54mm which is the same as the originals. All the reissue non-CuNiFe (ie paf style innards) I’ve seen have had a string spacing very close to that as well but I guess there could be other string spacing versions out there?

[madlovepickups]

Wrhb bobbins are larger in length and width than typical hb bobbins including those used in the non CuNiFe reissues. They are around 19mm wide.

[MattK]

I suspect the covers are sized to match the width of a Tele bridge plate since they were originally for the Tele Custom.

[madlovepickups]

Yes, you mean the tele deluxe? and the larger width comfortably allows more turns of wire than a standard hb bobbin using the same gauge wire and bobbin height.

[B.T.]

Thanks for the info guys! I’ll report back.

[sciuri]

Not sure if you’re only asking about the pole piece spacing, but I replaced the stock pickups in a MIM 72 Classic Series Tele deluxe with Fender CuNiFe reissue WRHBs (here) without needing any modifications to the pickguard, so at least the pickup cover mounting screw holes and outer dimensions are identical. I can’t say if the pole piece spacing is identical and wouldn’t trust my cheap calipers to measure a slight difference if there was one, but here's a before and after if that helps at all.

[MattK]

Yes, you mean the tele deluxe?

No I mean the Custom, that’s why it would match the width of a standard Tele bridge plate. The Deluxe has a hardtail Strat bridge.

[madlovepickups]

Yes, you mean the tele deluxe?

No I mean the Custom, that’s why it would match the width of a standard Tele bridge plate. The Deluxe has a hardtail Strat bridge.

Ah but the custom doesn’t have a wrhb in the bridge position. 54mm is very wide for the neck spacing but it didn’t seem to bother fender at the time.

[MattK]

I’m talking about how wide the cover is, to visually match the width of the bridge plate.

[madlovepickups]

I’m talking about how wide the cover is, to visually match the width of the bridge plate.

Ah I get you now, yeah they are pretty close, think they maybe a couple of mm wider than the vintage style baseplate.