How about a "modernistic" '58 V ?

[Blackdog]

OK, I finally found some time for posting. Let's carry on with the tale of the V...

Next, inevitably, came the point of no return: gluing the neck. (well, not really a point of no return, but a serious commitment anyway: I hate to have to remove a neck !)

First I lightly sanded the tenon with 320 sandpaper to allow an easier neck insertion. I usually cut the mortise for a VERY tight fit of the tenon. With the successive removals/re-insertions of the neck it slackens a bit. But if it is still too tight all the glue will be expelled from the joint: not good. So it's best to sand a little, I like to have an easy insertion barely needing any force to set it in place, but the neck should still stay put and not fall off. Another thing I do with the 320 sandpaper is slightly round off the lower edges of the tenon, this ensures a proper seating without any significant area reduction in the gluing surfaces.

I masked the area leaving just a small space around the joints to avoid having to remove excess glue in too large areas.

The gluing process itself is the same I described for the fretboard. With the ambient heater and the extra support of my wife with the heat gun. And applying the HHG to both surfaces with a brush.

The clamping of the neck is really simple. Just one clamp does the job.

After the glue dried, the final sanding of the neck joint took care of the excess glue. This went really well, hardly any glue line visible.

And this is what it looks like after cleaning a bit of the excess glue from the top and the cavity.

[Blackdog]

With the neck in place it was time to position the bridge. Since I have a separate tailpiece, I prefer not to base the positioning in any measurement, but to do it empirically.

I cut the slots on the nut for the two e-strings, they don't really need to be at the right depth at this stage, if they hold the string in place is enough.

The high e-strings of light gauges require hardly any compensation. The saddle will end up pretty much at the scale lenght position. So I set this saddle on the bridge to the front-most position and then back off just a turn of the screw for margin.

The low E-string is the one that will need the most compensation, and thicker strings will require even more. So I set the saddle about 2/3 back of full excursion. This will allow some intonation marging for fatter bottom strings of "normal" gauges whithout slanting the bridge too much. This is a good time for filing the saddle slot for these two strings, not too deep, just enough to keep the strings in place under bending or heavy strumming.

I load the two e-strings of the gauge I like for these instruments (usually 10-46), and mount the bridge loose over the top with some wooden spacers below to get enough clearance for the strings to ring freely. The spacers need to be short enough to keep the bridge post holes free. And then clip the piezo-equipped tuner to the bridge body.

Then I tune the strings up, not necessarily to pitch, but within the tuner recognizable range. And test the intonation at the 12th fret: the harmonic and the fretted note. Move the bridge around untill both strings run aligned properly with the neck sides and intonate well. That's the desired position for the bridge.

I remove the tuner and with the bridge held in place by the strings' tension (I may tighten the strings a bit more to increase the tension) I take the body to the drill press.

With a 4mm bit (I use the metric version of the Faber ABR bridge). Using the bridge itself as the guide, and with the drill off (rotating the chuck just by hand), I mark the drilling positions on the top.

Now I just remove the bridge and drill pilot holes of the desired depth for the bridge posts (I like the posts to bottom out on the holes). In this case I used a 3mm bit.

On harder wood, like maple, it can be necessary to tap the holes for the posts threads, but Limba is so soft that just driving the posts in takes care of the tapping.

I choose the metric version of the bridge because I prefer to use extra-long posts. You need about 15mm of the post portruding from the top for proper bridge action. The stock posts are usually 30mm (or less) long. That leaves 15mm to thread on the body at most. That doesn't clear the maple on Les Pauls, and on a 335 type barely get past the kerfed spruce bracing !

I like the posts to thread all the way into the mahogany back on LPs and solidly into the maple center block on 335s. I also prefer bronze posts for sound reasons.

Metric 4mm bronze threaded rods are locally available from any hardware store, while 6-32 rods are a lot more problematic. That is why I use the metric posts whenever possible.

The bridge posts are now in place.

One little thingy I had forgotten at this stage is that the treble-side post of the bridge goes through the pickguard. I had not foreseen a hole for this. I measured carefully and drilled an oversized hole (about 9mm diameter, like I've seen on large SG pickguards) on the pickguard template and corrected the pickguard accordingly.

[Blackdog]

How they achieved string grounding on the original V's is still a mistery to me. I've seen different things in pictures, and in any case it was unclear if it was the factory original setup or a later mod.

On Bigsby and Trapeze tailpiece equipped semihollows, Gibson usually run a wire from nearby to the bottom strap pin into the control cavity. Then they simply pressed the bare wire between the tailpiece plate and the body rim. I thought about doing something similar with the V tailpiece, but then opted for a solution that I like better.

This is what I also did on the Bigsby equipped ES355. I used one of the tailpiece mounting screws.

From the top opening of the mounting screw hole closest to the cavity I drilled the wire channel into the cavity. Then run the ground wire so that a bare section of it goes vertically into the mounting screw hole (difficult to see in the third picture, but it's there.

So, when the tailpiece is in place, the mounting screw threads bite the ground wire against the wood and make a very solid electric contact.

At this stage I decided that it was a good idea to test fit all the parts and also check if I liked the neck profile as it was, so after polishing the frets (they were already leveled and crowned) I assembled the guitar.

First the wiring.

The control harness on the pickguard is wired first (for the final assembly I will add a sheet of aluminum foil under the pickguard).

Then the pickups, output jack and tailpiece ground are wired to it.

[Blackdog]

Pickguard and pickups mounted and wired.

Time to cut the remaining nut slots and to adjust the nut action.

The strings fan out to the tuners rather sharply on this headstock design, this has to be accounted for on the nut slots. I use the Stewmac spacing ruler, and make pilot slots with the thin 0.010 nut saw first, and then enlarge the slots using thicker nut saws and the nut files. I finish the slots with a bit of deburring with 240 and 400grit paper.

For nut action I use the method of fretting the string at the 3rd fret and measuring the clearance with feeler gauges between the bottom of the string and the top of the 1st fret. The following values (in mm) work well for me: 0.35, 0.30, 0.25, 0.20, 0.15, 0.10.

So here she is, still sans-finish but in all it's angular glory:

The guitar plays really well and the preliminary assessment of the sound is quite promising. It's a bit neck heavy, but from my research this seems to be intrinsic of the design. I have an extra-wide leather strap that pretty much takes care of this problem. Fully assembled it weights 6.5lbs, very light.

I will refine a few details of the neck profile and maybe shorten the heel a bit more and make it sharper like on the originals. And then will proceed with the finishing stages.

[Blackdog]

This was pointed out already, and looking at the full picture (The almost finished thing) it became obvious that it had to be addressed.

Basically, this is a proper replica of the '58 V until you start looking up the neck and then the little Blackdog details become apparent: the offset dots, the wooden headplate and the feathers inlay. So that little remaining stroke of Gibson-ness at the headstock (the TRC) was definitely out of place.

I designed a TRC specifically for this, that ties in with the shape of the headstock, and keeps the mounting screw spacing of the old TRC. And made a template for it.

I had an offcut of the cocobolo I used for the headplate, but it was a bit too thin. So I laminated it to a 1.6mm maple veneer to build up thickness. Then I cut the new TRC from that.

With just the square edges it looked a bit crude, so I beveled the edges with the 45* router bit to expose the maple below from all view angles. VERY slowly, in several small steps, to prevent the router bit from catching the wood and throwing the piece across the room.

There ! IMO it looks MUCH better.

And this gets us to the point of this build I'm at now.

[ScottR]

This looks so much like a Gibson until you start looking at all the little details. You can tell by all the construction fine points that this never came out of a Gibson factory and then you notice the BD touches and you think, well of course, no wonder it looks so much better made than a Gibson!

Which, of course, is the whole point.

Beauty!

SR

[Prostheta]

That TRC is SO much better! Fantastic. I agree with everything already said. No need to repeat it.

I'm glad that you understand the difference between a neck joint that is too tight and one that is just snug. Piston fit is perfect. I've had to bite my tongue not to call out this "widely-accepted bad practice" of picking up a body with the neck without glue after seeing too many luthiers doing it like it is a good thing. Whilst the joint may be stable more often than not in service, radial/tangential seasonal expansion differences between the neck and body woods could result in "bad things" happening over the long term. Anything from a popped body blank join to a crack in the grain lines and/or finish around the neck joint. As you say, glue starvation is the most common problem. However you slice it, too-tight is bad practice and one that has stupidly become some sort of gold standard for set-neck luthiers. It might look impressive, but to somebody who knows what they're looking at....it's a timebomb.

I do have to briefly query the methodology of "making it tight to start out with" and relying on "insertions/removals to loosen the joint" though. It is compressing the fibres in the mortice sidewalls and on the tenon cheeks, meaning it is feasible that glue is less likely to penetrate the immediate surfaces of the wood for maximum bonding strength. Tight joints can also play havoc with the less-supported grain on the body face's leading edges of the mortice. Vertically withdrawing a tenon from a too-tight mortice can easily chip or chunk out bits where you really don't want to have to replace them! Ask me how I know. *cough*

All in all, I am more than convinced that you are in complete control of this build and know everything you are doing inside out. I guess I wanted to further illustrate the issues that other people might experience with this approach if they were not aware of them.

[Blackdog]

I'm glad that you understand the difference between a neck joint that is too tight and one that is just snug. Piston fit is perfect. I've had to bite my tongue not to call out this "widely-accepted bad practice" of picking up a body with the neck without glue after seeing too many luthiers doing it like it is a good thing. Whilst the joint may be stable more often than not in service, radial/tangential seasonal expansion differences between the neck and body woods could result in "bad things" happening over the long term. Anything from a popped body blank join to a crack in the grain lines and/or finish around the neck joint. As you say, glue starvation is the most common problem. However you slice it, too-tight is bad practice and one that has stupidly become some sort of gold standard for set-neck luthiers. It might look impressive, but to somebody who knows what they're looking at....it's a timebomb.

I do have to briefly query the methodology of "making it tight to start out with" and relying on "insertions/removals to loosen the joint" though. It is compressing the fibres in the mortice sidewalls and on the tenon cheeks, meaning it is feasible that glue is less likely to penetrate the immediate surfaces of the wood for maximum bonding strength. Tight joints can also play havoc with the less-supported grain on the body face's leading edges of the mortice. Vertically withdrawing a tenon from a too-tight mortice can easily chip or chunk out bits where you really don't want to have to replace them! Ask me how I know. *cough*

With my early builds I found it difficult to obtain a really tight joint. So, eventually, I developed the method I still use today: I do not have a generic mortise jig, I make a template matching the tenon every time. It's a bit more time consuming, but gets me the best possible fit without fail.

I don't rely on the insertions/removals to loosen the joint, but since that manipulation during the build is inevitable, it's better to account for it. So IMO "making it tight to start out with" is still better than the alternative.

I see your point that the slackening is due to fibre compression. But if it is still reasonably tight, a slight sanding opens the grain again and you still don't end up having to fill the gaps with glue (in true Gibson style !)

The water in the glue will also raise the grain to some degree. I like using the HHG at slightly thinner than honey viscosity, so the water contents is significant and the glue is easy to spread and impregnates the wood easily.

But it's clear, by the time you glue the pieces together "too tight" is definitely a bad idea. Maybe just as bad as "too loose".

[Blackdog]

This looks so much like a Gibson until you start looking at all the little details. You can tell by all the construction fine points that this never came out of a Gibson factory and then you notice the BD touches and you think, well of course, no wonder it looks so much better made than a Gibson!

Which, of course, is the whole point.

Beauty!

SR

Thanks Scott ! Your very kind !

L.

[Prostheta]

With my early builds I found it difficult to obtain a really tight joint. So, eventually, I developed the method I still use today: I do not have a generic mortise jig, I make a template matching the tenon every time. It's a bit more time consuming, but gets me the best possible fit without fail.

I don't rely on the insertions/removals to loosen the joint, but since that manipulation during the build is inevitable, it's better to account for it. So IMO "making it tight to start out with" is still better than the alternative.

I see your point that the slackening is due to fibre compression. But if it is still reasonably tight, a slight sanding opens the grain again and you still don't end up having to fill the gaps with glue (in true Gibson style !)

The water in the glue will also raise the grain to some degree. I like using the HHG at slightly thinner than honey viscosity, so the water contents is significant and the glue is easy to spread and impregnates the wood easily.

But it's clear, by the time you glue the pieces together "too tight" is definitely a bad idea. Maybe just as bad as "too loose".

I've thought for a long time that this is a very worthwhile conversation, even though is has definitely been done to death on various luthiery and woodworking forums for years. It hasn't been done in the context of a "beginner's guide-to" to highlight pitfalls, best practice, glue specifics, etc. Whilst I don't want to soapbox about it too much, I do think the "too-tight neck joint" crowd are doing people who are new to the craft a disservice. Perpetuating a bad habit as a gold standard or even a benefit. Maybe the reason I don't feel like soapboxing is because you know how much they'll complain....because it's their trademark. And it's offensive (possible racist if you're Ben Affleck). Worse still, buyers agree. Thousands of years of woodworking artisan's experience disagree with good reasoning. Don't shoot what isn't broken in the foot, to mix metaphors.

Too loose can be too loose if you're relying on the mechanical properties of your glue to do the work for you, definitely. Epoxy is good for retrieving simple joinery disasters, but a guitar shouldn't have to get to that point. Even gluing scrap stock onto a screwed tenon or into a cocked-up mortice and re-cutting them is superior to resorting to epoxy purely for gap filling. I sort of feel like I am preaching to the converted here, Blackdog but you know these words weren't aimed for your ears.

[Blackdog]

With my early builds I found it difficult to obtain a really tight joint. So, eventually, I developed the method I still use today: I do not have a generic mortise jig, I make a template matching the tenon every time. It's a bit more time consuming, but gets me the best possible fit without fail.

I don't rely on the insertions/removals to loosen the joint, but since that manipulation during the build is inevitable, it's better to account for it. So IMO "making it tight to start out with" is still better than the alternative.

I see your point that the slackening is due to fibre compression. But if it is still reasonably tight, a slight sanding opens the grain again and you still don't end up having to fill the gaps with glue (in true Gibson style !)

The water in the glue will also raise the grain to some degree. I like using the HHG at slightly thinner than honey viscosity, so the water contents is significant and the glue is easy to spread and impregnates the wood easily.

But it's clear, by the time you glue the pieces together "too tight" is definitely a bad idea. Maybe just as bad as "too loose".

I've thought for a long time that this is a very worthwhile conversation, even though is has definitely been done to death on various luthiery and woodworking forums for years. It hasn't been done in the context of a "beginner's guide-to" to highlight pitfalls, best practice, glue specifics, etc. Whilst I don't want to soapbox about it too much, I do think the "too-tight neck joint" crowd are doing people who are new to the craft a disservice. Perpetuating a bad habit as a gold standard or even a benefit. Maybe the reason I don't feel like soapboxing is because you know how much they'll complain....because it's their trademark. And it's offensive (possible racist if you're Ben Affleck). Worse still, buyers agree. Thousands of years of woodworking artisan's experience disagree with good reasoning. Don't shoot what isn't broken in the foot, to mix metaphors.

Too loose can be too loose if you're relying on the mechanical properties of your glue to do the work for you, definitely. Epoxy is good for retrieving simple joinery disasters, but a guitar shouldn't have to get to that point. Even gluing scrap stock onto a screwed tenon or into a cocked-up mortice and re-cutting them is superior to resorting to epoxy purely for gap filling. I sort of feel like I am preaching to the converted here, Blackdog but you know these words weren't aimed for your ears.

Beginners face a lot of challenges. More seasoned builders face most of the same challenges, but with a lot more resources in their toolbox.

When I was starting, getting a really tight neck joint was a challenge. So the "tight enough to be able to hold by the neck" mantra became a goal to achieve.

I would guess this applies to many/most beginners.

Then I learned about glue starvation and thought: Hey, this makes lots of sense !

So in the end nothing can replace good judgement. But I needed to achieve the level of precision required for a tight neck joint first, anyway.

If one picks up any book about wood joinery, all of this is well explained. But I don't think many beginners do it. So I tend to agree that maintaining the myth can be a bit of a disservice in a way. The part that is pushing people to learn to work with more precision is not necessarily bad. Let's hope that discussions like these one serve to put more people to question absolute statements and think by themselves.

Now about filling the gaps of a poor joint with epoxy… Does anybody really do this ? I have seen in this forum several times posts about rescuing a "not so good" joint using shimming and similar techniques, that are a much more proper way of dealing with the issue.

As a bit of trivia, a recent ES335 (A real Gibson) I rebuilt had big air pockets in pretty much every joint (neck-body, bracing-centreblock, etc.), filled without much success with tons of good old titebond. And I also found a real 1961 ES335, that I was considering buying, with a factory shimmed tenon. We can say that at least in the golden age they used more adequate rescue techniques…

But in this forum we are all aspiring luthiers. We must aim higher than any factory. And if something doesn't quite go as planned either learn to repair in a proper way or redo…. Something I used to say to my son when he was younger: There are two ways of doing something, Right or Again.

[ScottR]

With my early builds I found it difficult to obtain a really tight joint. So, eventually, I developed the method I still use today: I do not have a generic mortise jig, I make a template matching the tenon every time. It's a bit more time consuming, but gets me the best possible fit without fail.

I don't rely on the insertions/removals to loosen the joint, but since that manipulation during the build is inevitable, it's better to account for it. So IMO "making it tight to start out with" is still better than the alternative.

I see your point that the slackening is due to fibre compression. But if it is still reasonably tight, a slight sanding opens the grain again and you still don't end up having to fill the gaps with glue (in true Gibson style !)

The water in the glue will also raise the grain to some degree. I like using the HHG at slightly thinner than honey viscosity, so the water contents is significant and the glue is easy to spread and impregnates the wood easily.

But it's clear, by the time you glue the pieces together "too tight" is definitely a bad idea. Maybe just as bad as "too loose".

I've thought for a long time that this is a very worthwhile conversation, even though is has definitely been done to death on various luthiery and woodworking forums for years. It hasn't been done in the context of a "beginner's guide-to" to highlight pitfalls, best practice, glue specifics, etc. Whilst I don't want to soapbox about it too much, I do think the "too-tight neck joint" crowd are doing people who are new to the craft a disservice. Perpetuating a bad habit as a gold standard or even a benefit. Maybe the reason I don't feel like soapboxing is because you know how much they'll complain....because it's their trademark. And it's offensive (possible racist if you're Ben Affleck). Worse still, buyers agree. Thousands of years of woodworking artisan's experience disagree with good reasoning. Don't shoot what isn't broken in the foot, to mix metaphors.

Too loose can be too loose if you're relying on the mechanical properties of your glue to do the work for you, definitely. Epoxy is good for retrieving simple joinery disasters, but a guitar shouldn't have to get to that point. Even gluing scrap stock onto a screwed tenon or into a cocked-up mortice and re-cutting them is superior to resorting to epoxy purely for gap filling. I sort of feel like I am preaching to the converted here, Blackdog but you know these words weren't aimed for your ears.

Beginners face a lot of challenges. More seasoned builders face most of the same challenges, but with a lot more resources in their toolbox.

When I was starting, getting a really tight neck joint was a challenge. So the "tight enough to be able to hold by the neck" mantra became a goal to achieve.

I would guess this applies to many/most beginners.

Then I learned about glue starvation and thought: Hey, this makes lots of sense !

So in the end nothing can replace good judgement. But I needed to achieve the level of precision required for a tight neck joint first, anyway.

If one picks up any book about wood joinery, all of this is well explained. But I don't think many beginners do it. So I tend to agree that maintaining the myth can be a bit of a disservice in a way. The part that is pushing people to learn to work with more precision is not necessarily bad. Let's hope that discussions like these one serve to put more people to question absolute statements and think by themselves.

Now about filling the gaps of a poor joint with epoxy… Does anybody really do this ? I have seen in this forum several times posts about rescuing a "not so good" joint using shimming and similar techniques, that are a much more proper way of dealing with the issue.

As a bit of trivia, a recent ES335 (A real Gibson) I rebuilt had big air pockets in pretty much every joint (neck-body, bracing-centreblock, etc.), filled without much success with tons of good old titebond. And I also found a real 1961 ES335, that I was considering buying, with a factory shimmed tenon. We can say that at least in the golden age they used more adequate rescue techniques…

But in this forum we are all aspiring luthiers. We must aim higher than any factory. And if something doesn't quite go as planned either learn to repair in a proper way or redo…. Something I used to say to my son when he was younger: There are two ways of doing something, Right or Again.

I've been thinking about this for a while and decided to re-visit it. I hear about glue starvation from time to time but have never experienced it. I'm thinking a tight neck joint wouldn't be putting anymore pressure on the joint than the bar clamps used to glue body halves together. Or the press Carl had the opportunity to use at his school's shop.

Brett has posted articles about the testing of various types of glues and the strength of the joints for each several times that I can remember and one thing they noted in that article was they couldn't apply enough clamp pressure to starve any of the joints of glue.

Have you guys ever run across an example of glue starvation? What was the situation?

SR

[Prostheta]

You're more than likely correct about the pressures within a neck joint not being high enough to starve a joint by expulsion, however pushing in the tenon will certainly drag off glue from the tenon surface as it enters and displace it within the mortice. Feasibly it could create glue/air pockets which cannot escape and mostly-dry gluing surfaces. Possibly with misalignment as you cannot easily compress trapped air and glue. You really can't tell unless you make a few and test the extremes by bandsawing through them. So glue starvation is more likely from removal than physical expulsion through clamping.

Yeah, the pneumatic veneer press isn't exactly a trash compactor or Terminator-killer.

I've starved glue joints through expulsion when laminating Birch boards together to make larger sheets, eg. table tops. It does require an exceptional amount of overpressure though, so you have to put the work in to screw it up. A contributive factor is the physical compression of the material under pressure. Glue needs a willing and porous surface to work with. A squeezed (squozen?) sponge doesn't take up as much liquid as one in it's resting state.

In a luthiery context, we're more likely to see expulsion glue starvation in body blank joining than neck joints. The total glueup area is relatively small (around 200cm²/30in²) in a two-piece blank with pipe/table clamps having the capacity to far exceed what is ideal. For neck joints, the insertion is the most likely culprit.

I know I repeated myself a little here, but it has been a long day and I've injured my left hand. With a door. Opening one, not making one.

[ScottR]

With an overly tight neck joint it would be interesting to know if the mechanical joint created by the pressure of the fit equals the strength of the joint had not some of the glue been expelled.....does a mechanical joint plus a little glue equal a close fit with more glue? Like you said it would likely require some destruction to find out.

You know, I bet more hands have been injured by closing doors than opening doors. Hopefully you're not out of commision long or at all.

SR

[Prostheta]

I was actually opening a door. Fingers slipped and the weight went onto the one finger left, with a crack and shooting pain in my wrist. A bit of tenderness and reduced mobility. Nothing major.

Well, the joinery work I do more often than not aims for a "piston fit". Tight enough that the mating surfaces are in contact but not so tight that glue is dragged out to the (necessary) well at the bottom of the mortice. I use Titebond I for most of the work I value, which swells the surfaces to take up any minor surface imperfection - not slop. A well-made joint requires surprisingly little clamping pressure. Enough to align and hold the surfaces without an overly-large interstitial layer of glue. Enough to distribute pressure and the adhesive. Values exist for "perfect" clamping pressures, however these are meaningless if the joinery is suspect, glue application too scant or generous, etc. The usual stuff.

A neck joint doesn't get or require any clamping pressure other than locating and retention. A piston fit neck tenon is all that is required. Blackdog's photos say far more than I can. That is a perfect bit of work, and one that could be held up in any teaching classroom.

[ScottR]

A neck joint doesn't get or require any clamping pressure other than locating and retention. A piston fit neck tenon is all that is required. Blackdog's photos say far more than I can. That is a perfect bit of work, and one that could be held up in any teaching classroom.

Well said.

SR

[RestorationAD]

Nice!~

[ScottR]

Nice!~

What was that did you hear something? Was that the sound of a sabbatical ending?

SR

[RestorationAD]

Nice!~

What was that did you hear something? Was that the sound of a sabbatical ending?

SR

No. Just lured out by a slick V. I am going back to hiding.

[Blackdog]

A neck joint doesn't get or require any clamping pressure other than locating and retention. A piston fit neck tenon is all that is required. Blackdog's photos say far more than I can. That is a perfect bit of work, and one that could be held up in any teaching classroom.

Wow ! You guys are going to make me blush !

You're exaggerating quite a bit, I'm also a beginner ! On the other hand, you seem to be quite the scholar in these matters !

Is there a way to put in simple words your concept of the "piston fit" for other beginners to adopt ? Is it quantifiable how tight and how loose is the reasonable range for this ? A measurable range would help beginners a lot !

Thanks for the kind words, everyone.

The guitar has been disassembled now. I have re-shaped/shortened the heel a little bit and I'm getting it ready for the finishing stages.

In the meantime I bought a hard case for it. A Gator Extreme, or something of the sort. Man, that thing is huge !!!!

[Prostheta]

Beginner or not, credit where credit is due. You stuck to good woodworking practice and the result shows. No need to be coy about it!

I wouldn't go as far as to call me a scholar by any means. I've just spent a lot of time refining my work from where I was and validating/verifying what I knew with actual facts, best practice and methodology and lashings of practice on workpieces. The best things have come from screwing things up and taking something from the whole experience. I've done too-tight tenons in workpieces before only to find that the mortice cracks further down the line. Relating that to an instrument, at best you get finish cracks and at worst structural issues.

The term "piston fit" was perhaps used incorrectly by myself. It's more found when people are referring to toolchests, jewellery boxes and similar items where your insert trays are made so tightly to the sidewalls that you can drop them in they fall slowly as gravity is resisted only by the air that manages to escape around the edges. Impressive to see. For joinery purposes you do need some level of friction between the tenon cheeks and mortice sidewalls. That sort of lightly-resisted entry motion is what I was getting at, if somewhat obliquely. If you have to hammer or use clamping to get the tenon in, your glue has little chance of staying where it is most needed whether through expulsion or being physically removed. Pushing a neck into a mortice by hand is perfect, and you certainly wouldn't want to pick up your guitar with that!

Sorry, I'll let you crack on! I got into this mode of thought after seeing one video too many of a "professional" touting bad practice as some kind of positive thing.

[Blackdog]

ARRRRGGGGGHHHH !! I haven't had any time to get in the shop at all…. I'm already feeling the withdrawal !

Busy with the stupid day job (that fortunately pays for the stupid mortgage and a stupidly decent lifestyle) and band practice for a couple of performances in front of the usual deaf audiences….

I'm missing the smell of limba and mahogany dust in the mornings… It smells like…. wood-dust.

[Chuck_Chill-Out]

Thanks to all of you for the information on neck joint-age. Planning the next build (rebuild of a donated acoustic that was caved-in by a bi-polar girlfriend (not my girl-friend, but the previous owners)...long story) and attaching the neck is a concern to me. I really appreciate the knowledge shared here.

[Blackdog]

Finally some progress !!!!

The stars aligned and I found the time to fine sand this thing and leave it ready for the pore-filling. This means sanding to grit 320 and blowing the pores clean with compressed air.

Got my wife to do the pore filling as usual. Believe it or not she likes it !

For this one we used the oil-based Rustin's stuff (that dilutes in white spirits).

Now I'll let it dry for a day and will sand any remaining excess of filler off. Then I will be ready to spray the finish.

In the meantime I also got the case for this guitar. This wasn't trivial at all ! Not many decent options for a Flying V. The plastic SKB is really horrible. The Gator options are Chinese made and the quality is very low: I tried the Gator Extreme (that can be configured for several odd-shaped guitars) and it was so poorly made that I sent it back !

I decided I wanted the Canadian style hardcase, like the ones Gibson use, but the shop that usually stocks those in Holland (under the SCC brand) did not have the "V" shaped case available. I ended up buying it directly from TKL in the US. They gave me a good "builders discount" but with the shipping and local customs it wasn't cheap. But it's a good quality, elegant case.

[bileshake]

This is very cool, can't wait to see more.