Jump to content

SamIAmUBUF

Members
  • Posts

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SamIAmUBUF

  1. I almost asked not to get that reply, but I decided not to kill all of your fun. I'd love to make a purpleheart bridge cover for my bass. any suggestions, comments or warnings?
  2. Ok, brace yourselves for some solid stupidity What exactly is the purpose of a bridge cover?
  3. thanks for the offer, that would be great. let me know when you find your friggin calipurs
  4. yeah, I found that a little odd as well
  5. it's roughly based (bassed) on a couple of Ritter models and the BC Rich Wave
  6. there it is before all the routing. I'll get you a more recent pic as soon as I have one
  7. I really like the flower. I did something similar on a refinishing project Keep us up to date on how it's going
  8. yeah, I'd mentioned I want to use a stewmac box, which is basically the same.
  9. can you you install a battery box on the back of a bass between the pickups without a huge effect on your sound? I'm looking at the stewmac box (possibly the 18-volt if I can get away with it). I'm also open to other suggestions. This information may be useful to know as well; The through-body section is 1-5/16 thick. I'm using 2 active soapbars (so I'll be doing a lot of routing down the middle to begin with).
  10. to avoid a messy-looking joint, I don't rough within 1/16" of a surface that will be visible after gluing. obviously there are exceptions, but it works well for large pieces (like neck-through instruments)
  11. good luck on the calc final. I've been there 3 times (calc I, II, and III)
  12. The properties of wood may be different, yes (I believe Spruce was the wood in question in those tests), but the mechanism through which glues work is the same, and the basic structure of wood is the same. Of course, you've got oily, hard to glue woods as well, and those may requires some de-oiling (although again, there be arguments on that front), or maybe the use of epoxy (which does like a rougher surface). Gluing Metal is a completely different subject, natch. I've glued silver for inlay (good ol CA), but I'd probably go with epoxy or polyurethane for dissimlar materials. ← good insight. thanks again.
  13. lol no, I missed half of that. I guess I just assemed he was talking about metal, I didn't seem to consider any pivotal wood-wood joints on an airplane. (and, yes I realize you don't glue metals. that's what I was getting at when refering to the vastly different properties of metal vs. wood) Please excuse me, I'm extremely tired right now. finals week is taking it's toll, and I'm only one day into it. Any more contributions to the actual topic at hand?
  14. I don't know about here, but this has been discussed at length at the MIMF.com (register to read the discussions in the library). Every time it comes up, the consensus is that planing is best, scraping next best, sanding best after that, and that no wood surface needs 'roughing up' unless you're gluing stuff together with Epoxy. The fact surfaces need to be perfect, tight, and smooth is something that's underlined strongly whenever hot hide glue comes up as an option. PVA is less picky, but the same still holds true. You could do your own tests, of course, but my bet is that all methods will give you a perfectly strong joint. But I still trust a scientific study dealing with joint failure in airplane parts (much more extensive testing than anything you or I will be willing spend time/matierals performing at home), and the rationale makes perfect sense to me, while the 'rough things up' school of thought doesn't s'much. ← my only problem with relying on a study like this is that the properties of wood and metal are vastly different (not that it's really going to matter. the "do not rough" team is winning me over at this point anyway .) That aside, your point is taken. thanks for your input
  15. Seriously, don't. It's complete and utter nonsense, just like those 'toothing planes' desinged to give the glue something to 'bite' into. I think it was Forest Labs, in the US, that did some testing circa WWII regarding what kind of joints held up best (they were comparing planed and sanded joints in wood being used for aircraft construction). Hands down, a freshly planed joint beats out a sanded/roughed up joint. And if it's tight, it's tight, and you won't find the glue line. I know I can't easily locate the centrelines on the acoustic tops I've jointed. With the exception of epoxy, which likes something to 'bite' into, and needs to have glue left in the joint (ie, they're easier to starve), glues used in woodworking work best on FRESHLY planed surfaces, followed by freshly scraped, followed by sanded (I don't go past 220. Or below it, really). The reason I've seen bandied about for this is that a freshly planed surface is perfectly flat, there's no sawdust/contaminants in it, and you've got chemically 'free' ends on the wood fibres, that are looking to bond with something. Leave 'em out for a while, they're oxidise/reduce in the air, but given a chance, glue will do the trick. Undoubtedly, you can get good results with rough surfaces (glues have evolved, after all), but for the best surfaces, freshly plane prior to glueup. As I understand PVA chemistry, it chemically bonds the two porous surfaces together. Sinks into the surface a little (works on porous materials only), and presto! The glue itself isn't very strong (cohesive strength is negligible; epoxy's the only one that's good at keeping itself together), ie any gaps/areas where the glue line is thicker than absolute minimum thickness mean weak spots. This is doubly true for Hot Hide glue. Getting tightly fitting gluing surfaces is key. If you can do that with an edge tool (planes, chisels, scrapers), by all means to, sanding is good too, but don't go roughing up your surfaces unless you're using epoxy, which needs something to 'grip' onto, unlike PVA/AR or Hide glues. ← I'd like to see this smooth/rough gluing surface debate resolved to some extent. other than this post, are there any good arguments you guys can post?
  16. I've never really like green guitars, but I'm sold. they all look great.
  17. This is a tough one...for the photo I was playing around with using a different logo style across the headstock, something like this: I also like this next one, which would go on a long white plastic truss rod cover: And I have one more like a Rickenbacker logo (for a flipped truss rod cover): I don't really want to imitate the Rickenbacker logo too closely though --I'm not trying to fool anyone. But their truss rod cover is a big part of the look of their guitars...At any rate, any logo I do will be on plastic, not directly on the headstock, so I'll have time to play with that while the finish dries. ← I'm with zoso spencer. it feels more (for lack of a better word) informal. it makes it look more friendly and personal.
  18. I just read somewhere else that suggested that instead of gluing two perfectly planed surfaces that you rough up the surfaces with coarse sandpaper first --the idea is that your raise the fibers, which then mesh together with the glue, strengthening the joint and making it possible to achieve a near invisible glue line. Now, that's a long sentence. ← I usually go over the surface with a rasp.
  19. Dookie wasn't all that bad. Since then, it's been a steady downhill slide
  20. titebond:2 gorilla glue:0 you win, I'll buy the good stuff
×
×
  • Create New...