Are these original 70's Fender Wide Range Humbucker?

[tonfarbe]

Folks, I need your expertise with this.

I am in contact with a shop that sells a 1974 Thinline. They claimed that everything is original except for a refinish and the neck pickup.

When I asked them about the replaced neck pickup, they had no clue (I had to explain the visual differences between a new CuNiFe with 2 wires and the Fender Reissue WRHB with 4 wires).
Now the shop has sent me some photos and at first sight, both pickups seem to be the old originals.
The only small hitch is that there are no stamp signs on the back side.
Also the capacitor seems have been replaced.

What do you guys think?

 

[Tele-friend]

The caps definitely seem new, based on how shiny they look. Also the welding seems new. If they told you what their serial is, then there would be no problem for identifiying.
The pickup on first pic seems original, but like you say, usually there should be some kind of stamp on it. WRHB on my Tele Deluxe '74 have it.
The photo of the neck pickup is not so detailed, but if they say it is new, I guess they know why they think so.

 

[tonfarbe]

The caps definitely seem new, based on how shiny they look. Also the welding seems new. If they told you what their serial is, then there would be no problem for identifiying.
The pickup on first pic seems original, but like you say, usually there should be some kind of stamp on it.

Thanks.
Which serial number do you mean?
I have the serial of the neck plate which identifies the guitar as:
'Your guitar was made at the Fullerton Plant (Fender - CBS Era), USA in 1974'.

The pickup on the first photo is the neck pickup in question.

 

[tonfarbe]

Hmm, here's one without a stamp on the back: https://reverb.com/uk/item/2336953-fender-original-vintage-w-r-h-b-wide-range-humbucker-71-79-chrome

 

[Tele-friend]

Here is some random photo from reverb. CTS pots from '74 should have a serial 137-74-XX.
74 is year of production, XX is week of production. 137 means CTS pots.

 

[Tele-friend]

Hmm, here's one without a stamp on the back: https://reverb.com/uk/item/2336953-fender-original-vintage-w-r-h-b-wide-range-humbucker-71-79-chrome

Oh sorry, that is the neck pickup. I can only say what I see/have on my guitar. It could be that the stamp faded away. The pickup on first photo has some patina, so... It could as well be the real deal.
Good luck!

 

[tonfarbe]

I have asked the seller for a close up of the pots.
Let's see...

 

[tonfarbe]

The code on the tone pot seems to start with the letter E and I think I can read '500K' on the opposite site of the lugs.
So I think that at least the tone pot also has been replaced.

 

[tonfarbe]

Ok, just received photos of the pots.
These are recent procution CTS 500K solid shaft logarithmic pots, right?

 

[TimTam]

I would say 99% sure both pickups are original (a closer pic of the bridge, like the neck one, would help). Opening them up would make it 100% sure, as would making some electrical measurements.

1. Based on underneath appearance, they look like the very characteristic originals, including exactly how the effect of age looks.
2. I've never seen an attempted relic/fake of a non-original WRHB made to look exactly like an original. Underneath is usually the obvious give-away. And opening them up would reveal many other original features that would have to be replicated 'just right'. There are also published figures on DCR, inductance, resonant peak, and magnet strength of the originals that would have to be right.
3. Only the new Fender CuNiFe's look really similar to the originals in underneath features (except cable, which is insulated on the new ones), but not aging. But there is no real advantage/market for making the new CuNiFe's look like original ones, even if it could be done (the relative market values do not differ by enough to make it worth the effort).
4. None of the earlier Fender 'reissue' WRHBs (bar magnet HBs) look anything like that underneath.
5. None of the boutique WRHB clones (Telenator, or other makers' Alnico or FeCr2 ones) look quite like those pics underneath either, although some are closer than Fender's in #4. But inside they are different.

 

[tonfarbe]

Thanks, exactly my thoughts.