Fender Classic Series ‘60s necks - Strat vs Tele?

[Highway 49]

I love the C-shaped neck profile on my Fender Classic Series ‘60s Teles.
Sometimes the Soft V neck profile on my Fender Classic Series ‘50s Strat seems not quite substantial enough - for playing but also I wonder if the lack of wood contributes to it feeling less stable (eg truss rod needs more frequent adjustment).
So I’m thinking to try a Classic Series ‘60s Strat neck, which should be C-shaped, on my ‘50s Strat.
If you’re following, and I haven’t bored you too much, has anyone got (had) both Fender Classic Series ‘60s Teles and Strats, and can I ask you how the necks compare?

 

[fender4life]

I've had all 4, 50s and 60s classic series teles and strats. To me the 50s teles were the fullest feeling and the 50s strat a bit less. The 60s tele and strat were both considerably thinner than any of the 50s. As to movement, i generally find rosewood board fender necks tend to move a lot more than the maple board necks. I have 2 classic series right now, the 70s classic series strat, which has a bigger neck that both the 60s tele and strat, and a 60s thinline thats about the same as the 50s tele with maple board. Like the 50s teles i had, the thinline's neck moves very little. The 70s strat is about the same size as the thinline, considerably bigger then the 60s teles and strat, yet it moves a lot.

So as you can see, my experience has not been about size really but that RW board fender and fender style necks tend to move a lot more than maple. I've had a ton of bolt ons from fender, built many from warmoth and other 3rd party parts, had squiers, and other assorted ones. And thru all those i consistently found RW board necks move a lot more often regardless of size. There are always a few exceptions, but thats what i found almost every time.

All that said, unlike u i never found the fender rosewood C necks on the classic series to be bigger then the 50s V necks. Maye u feel that way because they have less shoulder But overall the 60s C necks in the classic series feel a good bit smaller to me.

 

[Highway 49]

I've had all 4, 50s and 60s classic series teles and strats. To me the 50s teles were the fullest feeling and the 50s strat a bit less. The 60s tele and strat were both considerably thinner than any of the 50s. As to movement, i generally find rosewood board fender necks tend to move a lot more than the maple board necks. I have 2 classic series right now, the 70s classic series strat, which has a bigger neck that both the 60s tele and strat, and a 60s thinline thats about the same as the 50s tele with maple board. Like the 50s teles i had, the thinline's neck moves very little. The 70s strat is about the same size as the thinline, considerably bigger then the 60s teles and strat, yet it moves a lot.

So as you can see, my experience has not been about size really but that RW board fender and fender style necks tend to move a lot more than maple. I've had a ton of bolt ons from fender, built many from warmoth and other 3rd party parts, had squiers, and other assorted ones. And thru all those i consistently found RW board necks move a lot more often regardless of size. There are always a few exceptions, but thats what i found almost every time.

All that said, unlike u i never found the fender rosewood C necks on the classic series to be bigger then the 50s V necks. Maye u feel that way because they have less shoulder But overall the 60s C necks in the classic series feel a good bit smaller to me.

Thanks, that’s all very interesting, and not what I expected - lots too think about

 

[archetype]

I've had all 4, 50s and 60s classic series teles and strats. To me the 50s teles were the fullest feeling and the 50s strat a bit less. The 60s tele and strat were both considerably thinner than any of the 50s. As to movement, i generally find rosewood board fender necks tend to move a lot more than the maple board necks. I have 2 classic series right now, the 70s classic series strat, which has a bigger neck that both the 60s tele and strat, and a 60s thinline thats about the same as the 50s tele with maple board. Like the 50s teles i had, the thinline's neck moves very little. The 70s strat is about the same size as the thinline, considerably bigger then the 60s teles and strat, yet it moves a lot.

So as you can see, my experience has not been about size really but that RW board fender and fender style necks tend to move a lot more than maple. I've had a ton of bolt ons from fender, built many from warmoth and other 3rd party parts, had squiers, and other assorted ones. And thru all those i consistently found RW board necks move a lot more often regardless of size. There are always a few exceptions, but thats what i found almost every time.

All that said, unlike u i never found the fender rosewood C necks on the classic series to be bigger then the 50s V necks. Maye u feel that way because they have less shoulder But overall the 60s C necks in the classic series feel a good bit smaller to me.

What does "move" mean in this context. I don't understand, yet.

 

[Twangandy_]

All that said, unlike u i never found the fender rosewood C necks on the classic series to be bigger then the 50s V necks. Maye u feel that way because they have less shoulder But overall the 60s C necks in the classic series feel a good bit smaller to me.

Same for me

 

[Twangandy_]

Fit a stray 60 w/RW very movable but after two years became stable

 

[fender4life]

What does "move" mean in this context. I don't understand, yet.

Changing relief.

 

[srblue5]

Sometimes the Soft V neck profile on my Fender Classic Series ‘50s Strat seems not quite substantial enough - for playing

I agree -- I have an MIM Classic '50s Strat and the neck profile does feel small. However, I've seen measurements on forums and it's not actually as thin as it feels, so it probably feels smaller because of the shape of the V-profile itself.

That being said, I have not found a '60s style profile that actually was bigger other than a Hot Rod '60s Strat from the late 2000s and the SRV signature Strat. The C or D profile might feel fuller than a V, however.

 

[Highway 49]

I agree -- I have an MIM Classic '50s Strat and the neck profile does feel small. However, I've seen measurements on forums and it's not actually as thin as it feels, so it probably feels smaller because of the shape of the V-profile itself.

Thanks, I’ve had a closer look and I think you’re right - it’s the shape, rather than thickness, so you have less there to hold - and so it just feels less substantial.
I was playing a AVII Vintage ‘57 Strat in my favourite guitar shop yesterday, and it’s definitely a chunkier neck, without being massive. Hard to say how I liked it because it was so sticky I couldn’t easily move around it… it was a hot day in London yesterday.

 

[clydethecat]

I have a 50s Classic Esquire, and a Strat with a 50s Classic Lacquer neck, and the only difference I can tell between their profiles is that one has rolled edges on the fingerboard and the other doesn't. I fergit which...

The Esquire is ten or more years older than the Strat.

 

[Grandfunkfan]

What does "move" mean in this context. I don't understand, yet.

Thanks, I thought it was me. I didn't get it either.

 

[clydethecat]

I have a 50s Classic Esquire, and a Strat with a 50s Classic Lacquer neck, and the only difference I can tell between their profiles is that one has rolled edges on the fingerboard and the other doesn't. I fergit which...

The Esquire is ten or more years older than the Strat.

It's the Strat with the rolled edges.

 

[Highway 49]

It's the Strat with the rolled edges.

I’ve also got the ‘50s Classic lacquer Strat - I hadn’t thought about the edges being rolled but, yes, my Teles are a much squarer experience.

 

[fender4life]

Also, note that while what i said and some other said, the 50s are generally bigger BUT, theres a 50s classic series "player" that has a maple board thats much thinner than other classic series maple. t;s even thinner then the normal 60s necks. It's basically a 50s classic series with modern features like 2 point trem, flatter radius and thin neck.

 

[clydethecat]

I’ve also got the ‘50s Classic lacquer Strat - I hadn’t thought about the edges being rolled but, yes, my Teles are a much squarer experience.

I spent some time today with both the Esquire and the Strat, and the differences are less than I thought I remembered. The Strat's edges are softer, but both have comfy necks, and neither are what I'd call "a squarer experience".