Andyjr1515

This is a great looking build by any standard....for a $100 build it is simply phenomenal! Small gap or not in the binding, I am very impressed indeed with your routing accuracy for what must be the pinnacle of binding router challenges

I'm no expert on scarfe joints but I would have thought this would be absolutely fine. I had assumed you were going for fig 1. Anyone else got a view?

Excellent progress, @Norris. Projects always seem to accelerate from this stage on.... Can't wait to see the finished article!

Hi @2.5itim. Another build....great! Lovely piece of flamed maple If you followed my thread on 'Tom's African Bass' you will know I'm not afraid of using unusual (and unsuitable!) woods . However, I'm a bit more cautious with neck woods. I'm no expert, but in terms of what I personally would do is this: if maple was available for the laminate, I would use this, with or without scarf joint. If I had no option but to go solid mahogany or a pretty laminated mahogany / poplar mix (with more mahogany than poplar) I would go for the laminated option but, as you say, have a scarf joint. Of course, if I had the time and cash, I'd make two necks, one with maple laminates and one with poplar - I would be curious whether the apparent extra flex of poplar makes any actual difference in a blind A/B test. But then, I'm a bit bonkers like that.... ....also bear in mind that there are more knowledgeable forumites than me who I am sure will chip in soon.

Yes - I'm sure the guy referred to classical guitars. i think it's worth a try, the sonic requirements and look is not so different between a dreadnought acoustic and a classical. If it's rubbish, I can always just sand it back off. I'll post the results and first impressions

Has anyone ever used this? It was a tip I picked up from an acoustic builder - in terms of clear grain filling. I was led to believe it was an old classical guitar technique.... I've tried it on a couple of guitars but both were in a rush so I didn't pay much attention to how it fared with other clear fillers, but it did certainly work just as well as, say, Birchwood Casey Sealer Filler. I might try it on the Dreadnought acoustic...Ill pay a bit more attention to how it fares. Anyone else heard of it or used it?

That looks great. I meant to say before - that is how I do my through necks. Exactly the same principle except I keep going with the router until I run out of wood i think it makes for a strong joint and leaves the top untouched. As they say, great minds think alike

That is gorgeous....

It's actually the potential for errors that have so often materialised into real ones that has led me down this path! Trouble is, it then makes a poor chap overconfident ..... I think I'm going to go for a dovetail after all!!! I've spent a lot of time over the past couple of days working out how it works and how you achieve the essential offsets and adjustability. I will do a dummy run with some offcuts but, if that goes OK, then I just might go for it....

I've been fine-tuning my neck and body routing rig this morning and it's now fully fit for purpose. As outlined above, it's a heavily modified B&D Workmate, then heavily borrowing ideas from the LMI / Robert O'Brien jig The body routing position was already fit to go: What I've now done for the neck routing configuration is put the secure micro-adjust for the neck angle (see the black knobs underneath) put a variable pressure clamp to hold the neck (also underneath) The neck is lined up on the angle board by a couple of studs that slot into the truss-rod rout. A simple carpenters variable angle (pictured) is used for setting the correct angle and the template lines up both with the indicator lines on the rig and also the centre line of the neck. If we get a bit of dry weather tomorrow, I'm planning to do a first cut!

These are coming along just great. Some excellent tips and techniques along the way, too. Thanks for this great thread

Just caught up to date with this thread - it looks really, really good. Love the colour and the standard of finish

Those are very nice looking necks. Watching progress with great interest!

I spent the morning checking measurements and preparing everything for the "Very Scary Bit" - routing the neck tenon and body mortice slot! This one really will be a case of check, double check, triple check, quadruple check before anything is cut. I now have built my jig to accurately route a dovetail as well as mortice and tenon, but I don't want to try a dovetail joint the first time ever on a build that matters and one that has a finite timescale. On the other hand, I have never been overly happy with the dry bolt-on approach I used on my OM. It works, but it does allow a bit of slack to develop as everything beds in. That's fine for my own guitar because I recognise when it needs a tweak, but not OK for a build for someone else So, I'm going half-way house - I'm going to use a version of bolt-on but glue it too. Get it all set up, angles, fit, heel flossing, etc, and then ultimately glue it Obviously, the neck will be 30mm shorter once the neck is slotted in, but it's beginning to look like a guitar....

Lovely job by any standard. For a first build, it is outstanding! Congrats

Not trimmed yet, but all four bindings are now safely on: While the dining room paint was drying, I managed also to get out with my cheapo-cheapo band saw to cut the rough outline of the neck: I'll be using one of the offcuts on the left to stick on to extend the heel to its full depth. But that's it for today. Got some serious digging to do next...sadly, not the foundations for a workshop

Actually, I think we've all done that at one stage or another. Problem is that maple is rock hard! As you say, drilling the hole is a must...and it needs to be the right size...and then many put a bit of soap on the threads before doing the 'one turn in and half a turn back out again'.

Loving the build! The router pics...are they supposed to be there?

+1 on this. I've had a 'big name' new strat in the past with a gap this big! It played great. If visually the gap offends your sensitivities, just glue some slivers of veneer along the two sides. Even with a natural finish you'll never see them. Quite often when I build bolt ons from parts bought from different places I have gaps like this and that's all I do. And as @Prostheta says, it is purely aesthetic...makes no difference to the strength, tone and playability

Amazing what you can do in an evening when you put your mind to it. Got the bending iron out and whistled through the last two binding strips. Got there particularly quickly to the point where they easily fitted into the mould. What I then do is clamp them to the mould with violin clamps and give them one last water spray before leaving them clamped overnight. I find it helps prevent the normal tendency to relax the tightness of the curves. Should be able to glue these on in the morning before the dining room decorating starts again!

Nah....it's not piddling and overthinking. It's correctly testing the validity of the solution in terms of 'Is it a possible solution to an actual problem? Is it theoretically sound? Does it work in practice?' My problem is that, often, I go about that process in reverse order So onto the back binding routing and the associated challenges For anyone who hasn't done an acoustic binding, let me explain. The back is dished much more than the top The angle at the edge of the back isn't, however, equal all around the perimeter - think tangents...where the waist pinches in, you are closer to the centre of the dish and therefore the tangential angle is smaller than at the upper bout and that is smaller than at the angle at the lower bout. Basically it's all over the place... So, if you have a relatively large router base , the rise of the back at this angle means that the router rises (the router has to be kept vertical to keep the bearing-guided cut even in width and straight-sided. Because the angle varies round the perimeter, the router therefore rises different amounts and the cut depth of the binding also varies, that is the bottom of the cut becomes a wavy line, not a straight one. But the bottom of the binding must be straight for aesthetics and because it wont bend in that plane...you would just get gaps The short version of the above is "Just trust me. It ain't gonna work!" I don't make enough acoustics to invest in the clever (but very cumbersome) Stewmac / LMI rigs. The precision base with the binding roller fitment won't work for the above reasons. So I thought I'd try out this from Stewmac: It's like a mini roller guided precision base. It is better than the big one because the base is much smaller, therefore the angle of the back at the perimeter affects it less. It still affects it, but at a manageable level. When I get round to it, I'll post a review of it but in brief, I'll give it 7 1/2 out of 10: It's a fiddle to set the right height Keeping the router vertical while cutting has to be done purely by eye - not easy You still get variation in cut depth, but it is a smoother transition It did a MUCH better job than my precision base (which is what I used on my OM build) Next job, in between decorating the dining room (I know - ridiculous - it was only done twenty three years ago!) is bending the binding and sticking that on. Thanks for sticking with it It's appreciated.

I usually do a 'just in case' double check on something as important as this. I suggest you pencil where the bridge will be and then double check using @ScottR 's method. My method is similar to Scott's. I wind the top E to almost full travel forward, I place the bridge at scale length for that saddle and then make sure that there is at least enough travel for the bottom E saddle to be at scale length + 4mm. My double check is then to measure one of my guitars of the same scale and see if it matches with a tad of extra adjustment either way forwards or backwards...

Well, whatever the merits or otherwise, my main concern is 'is the binding going to look OK?' I think it's going to be fine. I'm pleased I went with the rosewood rather than ebony (which is a pig to bend) - this is after a quick scrape: I think that once the finish is applied and the true colours come out, it's going to look nicely understated Just got to repeat the whole process for the back (no purfling, but the added challenge of the more pronounced curve of the back) and then it's neck, neck, neck!!! As always, thanks for the feedback, encouragement and debate, folks Andy

Nor am I. Then again, is it so different to the principle of contact adhesives? Good bond glue to one surface, good bond glue to the other surface, the only difference being that this is melting the bond of glue to glue rather than a chemical 'tack'. But the sure and unarguable fact is that I have absolutely no idea...

Maybe another letter to another supplier Yes, though, I agree - I wouldn't risk it for anything structural where you are relying on the full strength of the joint. Interestingly, however, it doesn't seem to be hugely affected by full cure - PVA melts with heat whatever and, provided there is enough there to melt in the first place, it seems to remelt, re-merge and re-set in the same way. Certainly, I've stuck veneer down successfully weeks after originally applying the glue. How much the strength is affected by this, on the other hand, is a complete unknown. We all know that you can remove a fretboard by heating it...but I wouldn't like to try to stick it back on using the same method!