2009 TDPRI Giveaway Winners List is available HERE

preeb · October 12th, 2009, 12:30 PM

Cool shots...
Not yet. I'm waiting and will keep you posted.

Mister B · October 12th, 2009, 12:56 PM

According to the article posted at the link below, acrylic lacquer wasn't formulated by Dupont until the mid 50s. I don't know how reliable it is but the author does seem to know what he's talking about.

http://www.provide.net/~cfh/fenderc.html

preeb · October 12th, 2009, 01:12 PM

Sounds correct...
Duco was the brand name for the Nitro Colors and Lucite for Acrylics.
On my lists, Lucite wasn't used on cars before 1956-57 while Duco was available earlier.
I strongly feel it was just plain old black lacquer but Sascha is still very confidant about reading it was acrylic.

whaledog · October 13th, 2009, 12:14 AM

FWIW, Nacho's description of his Esquire makes it seem more likely they used Nitro:

"Perfect replica of a Spring 1950 non-truss rod body Esquire finished in black with nitrocellulose lacquer. Killer gigging axe. Massive rock solid maple neck with great genuine comfortable V shaped profile. All parts are genuine vintage and the feel and sound is as real as it looks. Genuine pre-54 no number neck plate, engraved "NB" "TX 4183013."

(from http://www.telecasterplanet.com/)

preeb · October 13th, 2009, 03:31 AM

No... OMG... it's not Nitro after all... Not Acrylic as well...
I'm in the middle of back & forth email exchange with Nacho and a massive paint history internet digging...
I will post the verdict soon.

Moggl · October 13th, 2009, 04:52 AM

The earliest US patent relating to the invention of acrylic lacquers that I was able to find is dated August 1951, which puts it in the post-Nocaster era. :-)

On the entirely off chance, did they perhaps use Japanese lacquer? ;-)

olaftheholy · October 13th, 2009, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moggl

On the entirely off chance, did they perhaps use Japanese lacquer? ;-)

Bingo!

preeb · October 13th, 2009, 05:58 AM

OK... got all the missing info. Thank you Nacho!!! You are the best (-;
I'm not going to make it all public (please understand... it's not mine to share) but I'm going to complete the build post of course. Special paint was ordered and will get here tomorrow for me to experiment with. Stay tuned.

Tuxedo · October 13th, 2009, 02:06 PM

treadwm · October 13th, 2009, 02:51 PM

LOL! Random thoughts............... I'd watch this one!

Next season's new show.......drum roll.....

Guitar Detectives!

Starring

Preeb

whaledog · October 13th, 2009, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preeb

OK... got all the missing info. Thank you Nacho!!! You are the best (-;
I'm not going to make it all public (please understand... it's not mine to share) but I'm going to complete the build post of course. Special paint was ordered and will get here tomorrow for me to experiment with. Stay tuned.

I respect the fact that you are honoring a promise not to share the info.

But, I don't understand why the type of paint used on a 1950 Fender Esquire would be kept a secret in the first place.

preeb · October 13th, 2009, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treadwm

LOL! Random thoughts............... I'd watch this one!

Next season's new show.......drum roll.....

Guitar Detectives!

Starring

Preeb

Hehhh... that sure wasn't my plan... but I get the picture.
This guitar really sucked the juices out of me... I slowed down the build deliberately in order to gather more info and do it right. I started with a blurry photo and big round 0 info... but step by step, bit by bit this has taken shape, like a 5000 pieces puzzle. I had less than 50% of the specs when I started the build but I knew it was the only way to push it forward... otherwise it would have been a dream plan set aside for years. I'm left with 1 open question on the nail hole locatios... I can't see any in the photos... + there's a famous photo from early 1950 of a few black Esquires laying flat on a shelf with only the top painted black... this could mean that they didn't flip it to do the back and sides... so no nails at all... on the other hand, the stripped black Esquire photos show too many nail holes, almost like someone was experimenting with the nails locations until he got it to balance correctly.... so maybe they invented the flip nails after the first batch was done without them... in those early years anything could have happen and nothing was consistent.
I'm not 100% sure though. Any input or thought will be appreciated.

Dizi · October 13th, 2009, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whaledog

But, I don't understand why the type of paint used on a 1950 Fender Esquire would be kept a secret in the first place.

Was wondering the same thing. If the reason is exclusivity, without revealing the original material, it can't be proven authentic.

Tuxedo · October 13th, 2009, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whaledog

I respect the fact that you are honoring a promise not to share the info.

But, I don't understand why the type of paint used on a 1950 Fender Esquire would be kept a secret in the first place.

Maybe it's a rare paint that doesn't have much in way of supply

preeb · October 13th, 2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dizi

Was wondering the same thing. If the reason is exclusivity, without revealing the original material, it can't be proven authentic.

You are right. I'm not holding back on that detail... I just don't like to post the type of paint before I actually try it myself and verify the information as correct. I'll start to test it tomorrow and post the results.
I believe that premature or unproven information can do more damage than no info at all. Just give me a couple of days. The stuff I promised not to share is based on info I got from closeup photos I can't make public (not because I don't wish to...)

whaledog · October 13th, 2009, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preeb

You are right. I'm not holding back on that detail... I just don't like to post the type of paint before I actually try it myself and verify the information as correct. I'll start to test it tomorrow and post the results.
I believe that premature or unproven information can do more damage than no info at all. Just give me a couple of days. The stuff I promised not to share is based on info I got from closeup photos I can't make public (not because I don't wish to...)

Thanks for the clarification. That makes a little more sense.

But I still wonder why anyone considers info about a 70 year old commercial product - info that can be ascertained from a photo no less - is too secret to share with the public.

However I understand that if you got the information by promising not to repeat it, then you have to honor your promise.

preeb · October 13th, 2009, 04:43 PM

1) because this "70 year old commercial product" is one of the rarest guitars on the planet
2) because people who have a rare item and maybe plan to put it in a book or use it commercially don't tend to share information with the public
3) because I promised

I post whatever I wish to when I wish to. I don't have to justify my actions...
I also got an ugly email from one of you guys 10 minutes ago that turned a big question mark on this whole thing... so excuse my temperament (-;
Remember that editing an ugly post doesn't change the fact that all the subscribed members already got it in their mailbox...

All the important information is posted.
If you need to know a specific bit just ask... OK?

whaledog · October 13th, 2009, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preeb

I post whatever I wish to when I wish to. I don't have to justify my actions...

Indeed you don't.

Shepherd · October 13th, 2009, 07:45 PM

I guess your "source" is worried about people making forgeries if too much info is put out. I dont blame him with all the crap that goes on nowadays.

edgemarc · October 13th, 2009, 10:19 PM

Sit back and enjoy, try not to piss off a man who has shared so much freely.

redddog · October 14th, 2009, 12:09 AM

Seriously. I cannot fathom anyone directing a correspondence toward Gil that was anything less than amazingly grateful for the incredible generosity he has shown over and over again in sharing his incredible builds.

Gil, please allow me to speak for the whole forum when I beg you to understand that there are always people in any group who, for their own selfish reasons, feel the need to ruin things for everyone else. I can guarantee that 99% of the people on this forum would be royally pissed if it became known that you were harrassed, or even given the slightest bit of attitude.

mgdesigns · October 14th, 2009, 12:47 AM

+1000 what he said ^ !!

Scooter91 · October 14th, 2009, 01:02 AM

Gil, thanks for taking the time to share your builds with us, I've learned a lot from your posts and I hope folks can back off and let things come as they will...

Moggl · October 14th, 2009, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgemarc

Sit back and enjoy, try not to piss off a man who has shared so much freely.

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by redddog

Seriously. I cannot fathom anyone directing a correspondence toward Gil that was anything less than amazingly grateful for the incredible generosity he has shown over and over again in sharing his incredible builds.

Gil, please allow me to speak for the whole forum when I beg you to understand that there are always people in any group who, for their own selfish reasons, feel the need to ruin things for everyone else. I can guarantee that 99% of the people on this forum would be royally pissed if it became known that you were harrassed, or even given the slightest bit of attitude.

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scooter91

Gil, thanks for taking the time to share your builds with us, I've learned a lot from your posts and I hope folks can back off and let things come as they will...

+1

As interesting as this subject is (and the plot thickens), let's not forget Gil is as excellent as he is BECAUSE of the pain he takes upon himself to make sure every little detail is correct BEFORE he goes on about it. :-)

jimdkc · October 14th, 2009, 05:37 AM

Gil,

Please know that the vast majority of us are very appreciative of your sharing and understand that there may be reasons to not share everything!

Thanks!
Jim

olaftheholy · October 14th, 2009, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgemarc

Sit back and enjoy, try not to piss off a man who has shared so much freely.

I second that!

Shalom!

Tonetele · October 14th, 2009, 08:56 AM

Gil has given us so much in his threads. I've certainly learned a great deal and love his work. If he releases things that is HIS choice. Why not just sit back and learn. Maybe do your own work researching the paint/finish used. Learning is not all about gaining knowledge from someone else-that's part of it- it's also doing your own hard yards. Appreciate the fact that this man is sharing with us some of the world's best workmanship and attention to detail. Tonetele, Australia.

olaftheholy · October 14th, 2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tonetele

this man is sharing with us some of the world's best workmanship and attention to detail.

Not only that, but he made me a set of calibrated tele pickups as well.

touch Gil and you touch me....

-----

Now pay attention class!!!!

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 10:19 AM

As I'm still waiting for the paint to arrive (From the supplier in the northern Israeli city of Haifa...) I'll change the order of things a little.

First issue addressed will be the control cavity.
In both examined examples there were rough hand chiseled marks at the CRL switch area. I can hardly consider that a "spec"... but in any case there was NO step routing design. The step was created by chiseling some wood to fit the Hugh old style switch.

Here's a couple of shots to demonstrate the size

and compared to the later (current) smaller type

Normal Fender control routing depth is 1/4" less than the body thickness on all models so My initial routing depth was as follows:
(body depth - 1/4") = (1 17/32" - 8/32") = 1 9/32"
Obviously not deep enough for the original switch size...

I could crudely chisel the bottom like it was done on the originals... but this is over my limits even if that's the way it was done in 1950. I measured the difference between the body depth and the CRL to make sure there's enough room... it's only 1/8" but definitely safe and doable. Slowly and carefully...

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 10:35 AM

My finesse version of a crude chiseling (-;

And a perfect fit too. If it'll turn out killer... I'll use all original hardware so it's important to have it ready to accept the real thing.

That's it for now. More to follow soon.

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 11:07 AM

Just got the call.... the dope has arrived.
I'm on my way to pick it up + I'll also get some black pigment powder on the way so everything is setup for the test. Cross your fingers (-;

Lostheart · October 14th, 2009, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by preeb

My finesse version of a crude chiseling (-;

and a perfect fit too

That's it for now. More to follow soon.

And it's perfectly fine even for guys that are obsessed with replicating every little detail. There has to be a line between period correctness and sloppy workmanship which is evident in so many of the earliest guitars.

Gotta say...I love this thread to death!

And...one more thing for the folks who were complaining/b**ching/giving Gil hell because he kept some info private: go do the homework yourself!!!
Of the top of my head I could name at least 4 people who could have every or at least some info on those black 2-Pickup-Esquires.
Gil took the time out and got in contact with at least one (or did you talk to J.P. as well?) and is by no means required to share it freely on a public board.

Dizi · October 14th, 2009, 12:27 PM

So glad to see more progress! I was starting to get withdrawls.

Tom_B · October 14th, 2009, 12:55 PM

Not to beat a dead horse, but,

Thanks Gil!

This is great fun for me to watch unfold!

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 12:55 PM

When you're using the term "DOPE" you should know that it came from this real dope used extensively in the 50's. Yes, It smells that bad... (-;

Did you ever get nasty gasses and sap coming out of the wood before the finish hardens enough resulting with swells, pores and other horrible finish candies ?
If you did (and if you didn't... which is also fine) then I'm sure you probably spit about 20 curses in at least three languages... I did.

My solution to the above mentioned problem was to freeze the place down until the lacquer is hard but I used to do something else too in the past... I replaced the nitro thinner with pure acetone. It evaporates so quickly that it doesn't give the under coats (primer, sealer and paint) a chance to soften and therefore solves the problem. The problem with acetone is the same as its advantage, it's a double edge sword ... it drys way too fast not allowing the fresh coat to level properly and doesn't melt into the previous coat very well.

Pine is probably a reasonable candidate for Airplane Dope (That's the commercial name for Aircraft Models Dope) because its sap wants to get out badly and it's a rather "airy" wood (vs dense) that might release some gasses too...

Doing the smell test (and staying alive), I believe this stuff is a simple Nitro based lacquer with acetone and maybe another agent or two to allow it to flow better (like the Smoothie I use for the clear coats). Doing the finger test, it dries immediately (!!!) and feels a little oily... just like smoothie does...

The thinner is acetone based and has the oily agents in it which means the lacquer has a low amount of thinner already in it and the thinner contains the additives which is normal.

The product has no label indicating ingrediants... it just says: "Drying time 15-40 min."... probably a typo... should be seconds (-;

I'm guessing that this stuff should yield a super thin nitro coat that is a bit softer than pure nitro due to the Hugh percentage of additives. The aircraft dope has to be very flexible to survive the bends and twists of a thin model airplane stretched fabric.

If it works fine I'll make it myself next time with some plasticizer and smoothie agents + acetone. I'm sure my nitro lacquer is Superior to the one used here.... and it comes with a nasty price tag...

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 01:19 PM

Oh... I forgot... What on earth brought me to the conclusion that this is the right stuff...

Looking at the original black double Esquire paint, I noticed a couple of things:
1) It's full of little scratches that didn't chip at all
2) It has a badly damaged area on the top horn
3) It has a few edge dings that got down to bare wood

Watch in full size!

Knowing old fragile nitro on early 50's Fenders (at least the ones that I own), I believe that IF it was a standard nitro finish the above damages would have been followed by chipping and cracking at best...

The reason it survived so well is softness. It must have been a slightly softer material.
I don't know for sure if it was that material but the source is highly reliable (Alan Hamel).
Given the source and the matching material properties and the period it was used... I believe it's the best I can do for now. The only thing to do to verify this is to do a lab test for the material sampled from the guitar itself (yeah right....).

MikeMurray · October 14th, 2009, 01:26 PM

Interesting stuff man :D

Nice condition of that considering it's from the 50s - when was photo taken?

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 01:47 PM

1995... it was 45 years old. I'm only 43 and I'm starting to develop cracks (-;

PaisleyIsGod · October 14th, 2009, 02:10 PM

The only thing I don't like about this thread is that I didn't stumble upon it after the build was done so I wouldn't have to wait to see more! This is great, keep it coming.

preeb · October 14th, 2009, 02:36 PM

Yeah... Me too

October 13th, 2009, 12:14 AM	#124 (permalink)
whaledog TDPRI Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: los angeles Posts: 44	FWIW, Nacho's description of his Esquire makes it seem more likely they used Nitro: "Perfect replica of a Spring 1950 non-truss rod body Esquire finished in black with nitrocellulose lacquer. Killer gigging axe. Massive rock solid maple neck with great genuine comfortable V shaped profile. All parts are genuine vintage and the feel and sound is as real as it looks. Genuine pre-54 no number neck plate, engraved "NB" "TX 4183013." (from http://www.telecasterplanet.com/) Last edited by whaledog; October 13th, 2009 at 03:27 PM.

October 13th, 2009, 04:52 AM	#126 (permalink)
Moggl Tele-Meister Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Germany Age: 43 Posts: 288	The earliest US patent relating to the invention of acrylic lacquers that I was able to find is dated August 1951, which puts it in the post-Nocaster era. :-) On the entirely off chance, did they perhaps use Japanese lacquer? ;-) __________________

October 14th, 2009, 01:02 AM	#143 (permalink)
Scooter91 TDPRI Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: West Central MN Age: 47 Posts: 79	Gil, thanks for taking the time to share your builds with us, I've learned a lot from your posts and I hope folks can back off and let things come as they will... __________________ -Dave

October 14th, 2009, 10:35 AM	#150 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	My finesse version of a crude chiseling (-; And a perfect fit too. If it'll turn out killer... I'll use all original hardware so it's important to have it ready to accept the real thing. That's it for now. More to follow soon. Last edited by preeb; October 14th, 2009 at 01:26 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1950 Fender Esquire?	t3l3cast3r	Telecaster Discussion Forum	26	March 25th, 2009 08:52 PM
My 1950 Esquire	numeric	Bad Dog Cafe	8	December 18th, 2008 11:25 AM
1950 Esquire Saddles	Tuxedo	Tele-Tech	0	September 4th, 2008 01:56 AM
1950 Esquire Routing	Tuxedo	Tele-Tech	2	August 8th, 2008 03:27 PM
1950 NAMM Esquire Question	Vegasrock	Telecaster Discussion Forum	7	August 11th, 2007 01:07 PM

October 12th, 2009, 12:30 PM	#121 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	Cool shots... Not yet. I'm waiting and will keep you posted.

October 12th, 2009, 12:56 PM	#122 (permalink)
Mister B TDPRI Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 50	According to the article posted at the link below, acrylic lacquer wasn't formulated by Dupont until the mid 50s. I don't know how reliable it is but the author does seem to know what he's talking about. http://www.provide.net/~cfh/fenderc.html

October 12th, 2009, 01:12 PM	#123 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	Sounds correct... Duco was the brand name for the Nitro Colors and Lucite for Acrylics. On my lists, Lucite wasn't used on cars before 1956-57 while Duco was available earlier. I strongly feel it was just plain old black lacquer but Sascha is still very confidant about reading it was acrylic.

October 13th, 2009, 03:31 AM	#125 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	No... OMG... it's not Nitro after all... Not Acrylic as well... I'm in the middle of back & forth email exchange with Nacho and a massive paint history internet digging... I will post the verdict soon.

October 13th, 2009, 05:58 AM	#128 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	OK... got all the missing info. Thank you Nacho!!! You are the best (-; I'm not going to make it all public (please understand... it's not mine to share) but I'm going to complete the build post of course. Special paint was ordered and will get here tomorrow for me to experiment with. Stay tuned.

October 13th, 2009, 02:06 PM	#129 (permalink)
Tuxedo Tele-Holic Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 524

October 13th, 2009, 02:51 PM	#130 (permalink)
treadwm Tele-Meister Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Maine Posts: 174	LOL! Random thoughts............... I'd watch this one! Next season's new show.......drum roll..... Guitar Detectives! Starring Preeb

October 13th, 2009, 04:43 PM	#137 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	1) because this "70 year old commercial product" is one of the rarest guitars on the planet 2) because people who have a rare item and maybe plan to put it in a book or use it commercially don't tend to share information with the public 3) because I promised I post whatever I wish to when I wish to. I don't have to justify my actions... I also got an ugly email from one of you guys 10 minutes ago that turned a big question mark on this whole thing... so excuse my temperament (-; Remember that editing an ugly post doesn't change the fact that all the subscribed members already got it in their mailbox... All the important information is posted. If you need to know a specific bit just ask... OK?

October 13th, 2009, 07:45 PM	#139 (permalink)
Shepherd Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Maple Ridge, Canada Posts: 1,033	I guess your "source" is worried about people making forgeries if too much info is put out. I dont blame him with all the crap that goes on nowadays.

October 13th, 2009, 10:19 PM	#140 (permalink)
edgemarc Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Bonsall California Posts: 293	Sit back and enjoy, try not to piss off a man who has shared so much freely.

October 14th, 2009, 12:09 AM	#141 (permalink)
redddog Tele-Meister Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rochester, NY Age: 41 Posts: 305	Seriously. I cannot fathom anyone directing a correspondence toward Gil that was anything less than amazingly grateful for the incredible generosity he has shown over and over again in sharing his incredible builds. Gil, please allow me to speak for the whole forum when I beg you to understand that there are always people in any group who, for their own selfish reasons, feel the need to ruin things for everyone else. I can guarantee that 99% of the people on this forum would be royally pissed if it became known that you were harrassed, or even given the slightest bit of attitude.

October 14th, 2009, 12:47 AM	#142 (permalink)
mgdesigns Tele-Holic Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Franklin, TN Age: 57 Posts: 517 4 Photos	+1000 what he said ^ !!

October 14th, 2009, 05:37 AM	#145 (permalink)
jimdkc Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Independence, MO Age: 53 Posts: 129	Gil, Please know that the vast majority of us are very appreciative of your sharing and understand that there may be reasons to not share everything! Thanks! Jim

October 14th, 2009, 08:56 AM	#147 (permalink)
Tonetele Tele-Meister Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Surrey Downs Age: 53 Posts: 107	Gil has given us so much in his threads. I've certainly learned a great deal and love his work. If he releases things that is HIS choice. Why not just sit back and learn. Maybe do your own work researching the paint/finish used. Learning is not all about gaining knowledge from someone else-that's part of it- it's also doing your own hard yards. Appreciate the fact that this man is sharing with us some of the world's best workmanship and attention to detail. Tonetele, Australia.

October 14th, 2009, 10:19 AM	#149 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	As I'm still waiting for the paint to arrive (From the supplier in the northern Israeli city of Haifa...) I'll change the order of things a little. First issue addressed will be the control cavity. In both examined examples there were rough hand chiseled marks at the CRL switch area. I can hardly consider that a "spec"... but in any case there was NO step routing design. The step was created by chiseling some wood to fit the Hugh old style switch. Here's a couple of shots to demonstrate the size and compared to the later (current) smaller type Normal Fender control routing depth is 1/4" less than the body thickness on all models so My initial routing depth was as follows: (body depth - 1/4") = (1 17/32" - 8/32") = 1 9/32" Obviously not deep enough for the original switch size... I could crudely chisel the bottom like it was done on the originals... but this is over my limits even if that's the way it was done in 1950. I measured the difference between the body depth and the CRL to make sure there's enough room... it's only 1/8" but definitely safe and doable. Slowly and carefully...

October 14th, 2009, 11:07 AM	#151 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	Just got the call.... the dope has arrived. I'm on my way to pick it up + I'll also get some black pigment powder on the way so everything is setup for the test. Cross your fingers (-;

October 14th, 2009, 12:27 PM	#153 (permalink)
Dizi Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Yorba Linda, CA Age: 41 Posts: 412 6 Photos	So glad to see more progress! I was starting to get withdrawls.

October 14th, 2009, 12:55 PM	#154 (permalink)
Tom_B Tele-Meister Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Astoria, NY Posts: 145	Not to beat a dead horse, but, Thanks Gil! This is great fun for me to watch unfold!

October 14th, 2009, 12:55 PM	#155 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	When you're using the term "DOPE" you should know that it came from this real dope used extensively in the 50's. Yes, It smells that bad... (-; Did you ever get nasty gasses and sap coming out of the wood before the finish hardens enough resulting with swells, pores and other horrible finish candies ? If you did (and if you didn't... which is also fine) then I'm sure you probably spit about 20 curses in at least three languages... I did. My solution to the above mentioned problem was to freeze the place down until the lacquer is hard but I used to do something else too in the past... I replaced the nitro thinner with pure acetone. It evaporates so quickly that it doesn't give the under coats (primer, sealer and paint) a chance to soften and therefore solves the problem. The problem with acetone is the same as its advantage, it's a double edge sword ... it drys way too fast not allowing the fresh coat to level properly and doesn't melt into the previous coat very well. Pine is probably a reasonable candidate for Airplane Dope (That's the commercial name for Aircraft Models Dope) because its sap wants to get out badly and it's a rather "airy" wood (vs dense) that might release some gasses too... Doing the smell test (and staying alive), I believe this stuff is a simple Nitro based lacquer with acetone and maybe another agent or two to allow it to flow better (like the Smoothie I use for the clear coats). Doing the finger test, it dries immediately (!!!) and feels a little oily... just like smoothie does... The thinner is acetone based and has the oily agents in it which means the lacquer has a low amount of thinner already in it and the thinner contains the additives which is normal. The product has no label indicating ingrediants... it just says: "Drying time 15-40 min."... probably a typo... should be seconds (-; I'm guessing that this stuff should yield a super thin nitro coat that is a bit softer than pure nitro due to the Hugh percentage of additives. The aircraft dope has to be very flexible to survive the bends and twists of a thin model airplane stretched fabric. If it works fine I'll make it myself next time with some plasticizer and smoothie agents + acetone. I'm sure my nitro lacquer is Superior to the one used here.... and it comes with a nasty price tag...

October 14th, 2009, 01:19 PM	#156 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	Oh... I forgot... What on earth brought me to the conclusion that this is the right stuff... Looking at the original black double Esquire paint, I noticed a couple of things: 1) It's full of little scratches that didn't chip at all 2) It has a badly damaged area on the top horn 3) It has a few edge dings that got down to bare wood Watch in full size! Knowing old fragile nitro on early 50's Fenders (at least the ones that I own), I believe that IF it was a standard nitro finish the above damages would have been followed by chipping and cracking at best... The reason it survived so well is softness. It must have been a slightly softer material. I don't know for sure if it was that material but the source is highly reliable (Alan Hamel). Given the source and the matching material properties and the period it was used... I believe it's the best I can do for now. The only thing to do to verify this is to do a lab test for the material sampled from the guitar itself (yeah right....).

2009 TDPRI Giveaway Winners List is available HERE

IMPORTANT:Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult! No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.

October 14th, 2009, 01:26 PM	#157 (permalink)
MikeMurray Tele-Meister Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: South Africa - Free State Age: 19 Posts: 171	Interesting stuff man :D Nice condition of that considering it's from the 50s - when was photo taken?

October 14th, 2009, 01:47 PM	#158 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	1995... it was 45 years old. I'm only 43 and I'm starting to develop cracks (-;

October 14th, 2009, 02:10 PM	#159 (permalink)
PaisleyIsGod Tele-Meister Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Halifax Age: 19 Posts: 236	The only thing I don't like about this thread is that I didn't stumble upon it after the build was done so I wouldn't have to wait to see more! This is great, keep it coming.

October 14th, 2009, 02:36 PM	#160 (permalink)
preeb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Israel Age: 43 Posts: 1,800	Yeah... Me too