Protruding ferrules . . . nitpicking design question.

Sidney Vicious · November 5th, 2003, 03:22 PM

I have a 60's Classic with the flush/sunken ferrules - great guitar.

I have a new MIM Standard with the protruding ferrules - great guitar - except for those ferrules! Lay the thing down on a bar top and the ferrules are likely to scratch the wood - (not to worry I own the bar -its in my house and doubles as my music room!) but why build with the protrusion out the back when the flush/sunken work as well for tone and without the drawback?

Kevin · November 5th, 2003, 03:43 PM

Because it's an extra step to countersink regular ferrules. More work = more money, which is not what the MIM standard is about....

The standard ferrule has a 5/16" OD (= outside diameter) with a 3/8" lip. You have to drill the hole 3/8" deep and 5/16" around, and then countersink the top 1/16" to a diameter of 3/8".

I got so disgusted with having to countersink regular ferrules in the bodies that I build that I quit using them. Now I only use Stew Mac ferrules that have a 3/8" diameter for the entire length. Once installed, they look just like vintage countersunk ferrules, and the drilling process is only one step.

Callaham sells similar ferrules, BTW.

Sidney Vicious · November 6th, 2003, 08:28 AM

Thanks Kevin, should of known!

Kevin · November 6th, 2003, 09:49 AM

If it really drives you crazy -- and you have a drill press -- you can do a countersink in the pre-drilled holes. You can only do this, however, if the ferrule holes are cut to 3/8" deep; if they're too deep, you won't have enough support for the ferrules. One of the reasons that mfrs. don't like to countersink the ferrules is that the drilling has to be much more precise; if you leave the lip of the ferrule resting on the guitar body, it doesn't matter how deep the hole is. If you want them flush, though, the holes have to be the precise depth and they all have to be the same....

Anyway, assuming that you have the proper-depth on the holes.... Take six 5/16" dowells cut to 3/8" length and insert them in the ferrule holes. Mark a center line through them. These dowells will be removed and are only there to provide a stable resistance to the drill bit in the next step.

When the center-points are marked, take a 3/8" brad-point bit and drill a 1/16" deep hole at all of the ferrule positions. You probably want to put some masking tape over the finish before you drill to lessen (not remove) the chance of chipping the finish....

Take a 1/8" drill bit and push the dowels out from the front of the body. You should now have the countersinks at each position.

I've done this before and it works, but if you decide to try it, I'm not responsible for you messing up your guitar body.

josephandmary · November 6th, 2003, 10:25 AM

I've been wondering about ferrules anyway.

Do they actually add anything to the twang of a telecaster? I'm building a frankenstein tele to try different things in search of the source of twang.

How about if I do away with ferrules altogether and just have a brass plate (sunk into the wood on the back of the body) with six small holes drilled in it.

Has anybody tried this? Will the pressure of six strings pulling that brass plate give better contact with the wood and lead to more twang?

Or have I just gone totally mad?

Kevin · November 6th, 2003, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josephandmary

...How about if I do away with ferrules altogether and just have a brass plate (sunk into the wood on the back of the body) with six small holes drilled in it.

Has anybody tried this?
[snip]

Didn't G&L do that with some of the ASATs? I'm not sure if they do it anymore, but it seems as though they did on the early ones. I doubt it would make any difference in the tone, though -- it's just less expensive.

josephandmary · November 7th, 2003, 04:32 AM

Thanks. I'll dig around for information on early ASATs - and if it makes any worthwhile difference I'll tell the world.

November 5th, 2003, 03:22 PM	#1 (permalink)
Sidney Vicious Tele-Afflicted Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Orleans, Louisiana, USA Posts: 1,070 6 Photos	Protruding ferrules . . . nitpicking design question. I have a 60's Classic with the flush/sunken ferrules - great guitar. I have a new MIM Standard with the protruding ferrules - great guitar - except for those ferrules! Lay the thing down on a bar top and the ferrules are likely to scratch the wood - (not to worry I own the bar -its in my house and doubles as my music room!) but why build with the protrusion out the back when the flush/sunken work as well for tone and without the drawback?

November 6th, 2003, 08:28 AM	#3 (permalink)
Sidney Vicious Tele-Afflicted Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Orleans, Louisiana, USA Posts: 1,070 6 Photos	So money is at the root of it . . . Thanks Kevin, should of known!

November 5th, 2003, 03:43 PM	#2 (permalink)
Kevin Friend of Leo's Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Terre Haute, IN Posts: 2,967	Because it's an extra step to countersink regular ferrules. More work = more money, which is not what the MIM standard is about.... The standard ferrule has a 5/16" OD (= outside diameter) with a 3/8" lip. You have to drill the hole 3/8" deep and 5/16" around, and then countersink the top 1/16" to a diameter of 3/8". I got so disgusted with having to countersink regular ferrules in the bodies that I build that I quit using them. Now I only use Stew Mac ferrules that have a 3/8" diameter for the entire length. Once installed, they look just like vintage countersunk ferrules, and the drilling process is only one step. Callaham sells similar ferrules, BTW.

November 6th, 2003, 09:49 AM	#4 (permalink)
Kevin Friend of Leo's Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Terre Haute, IN Posts: 2,967	If it really drives you crazy -- and you have a drill press -- you can do a countersink in the pre-drilled holes. You can only do this, however, if the ferrule holes are cut to 3/8" deep; if they're too deep, you won't have enough support for the ferrules. One of the reasons that mfrs. don't like to countersink the ferrules is that the drilling has to be much more precise; if you leave the lip of the ferrule resting on the guitar body, it doesn't matter how deep the hole is. If you want them flush, though, the holes have to be the precise depth and they all have to be the same.... Anyway, assuming that you have the proper-depth on the holes.... Take six 5/16" dowells cut to 3/8" length and insert them in the ferrule holes. Mark a center line through them. These dowells will be removed and are only there to provide a stable resistance to the drill bit in the next step. When the center-points are marked, take a 3/8" brad-point bit and drill a 1/16" deep hole at all of the ferrule positions. You probably want to put some masking tape over the finish before you drill to lessen (not remove) the chance of chipping the finish.... Take a 1/8" drill bit and push the dowels out from the front of the body. You should now have the countersinks at each position. I've done this before and it works, but if you decide to try it, I'm not responsible for you messing up your guitar body.

November 6th, 2003, 10:25 AM	#5 (permalink)
josephandmary TDPRI Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: London Posts: 32	I've been wondering about ferrules anyway. Do they actually add anything to the twang of a telecaster? I'm building a frankenstein tele to try different things in search of the source of twang. How about if I do away with ferrules altogether and just have a brass plate (sunk into the wood on the back of the body) with six small holes drilled in it. Has anybody tried this? Will the pressure of six strings pulling that brass plate give better contact with the wood and lead to more twang? Or have I just gone totally mad?

November 7th, 2003, 04:32 AM	#7 (permalink)
josephandmary TDPRI Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: London Posts: 32	Thanks. I'll dig around for information on early ASATs - and if it makes any worthwhile difference I'll tell the world.