Wrong body shape on modern Fenders

[Troels]

Yesterday I went to the biggest music store in Copenhagen Denmark to buy myself another Startocaster. I tested quite many - and I do wonder - why is it impossible for Fender to make a nice original body outline.

ALL the guitars I looked a had slight imperfections - bumps and so on strangely angled curves on the body horns... and so on. Then I took a look at some Teles as well - same story - I was impossible to find a Strat or Tele with correct body shape. I've studied Fender guitars in details for many years and I do know to the slightest details what the body should look like - and Fender is not able to produce - and that counts for the Custom Shop as well unfortunately - guitars with correct body shapes. I took a look at a Tele CS ($6.000 !) simply directly ugly in the body shape - not even close the a beatifull original vintage Tele shape and neither were any of the Strats.
I ended up buying a Fender The Strat (CAR) from 1979 vias the web for a lot less - but with a nicely smoothly shaped body (even thoug 70s and early 80s guitars don't fit the original pattern either...). Anyone else here who has done similary observations? Troels

 

[jkats]

Strat Body Shape Issues

I understand the aggravation with guitars that are "not quite right." I can't comment on whether Fender is following their original designs on all of their models. However, the post-1998 "new American vintage" series was supposed to mark a return to the original specs, and the MIJ guitars have a reputation for being close to the originals (except for 12th fret dot spacing on late-60s and 70s reissues).
What I am bothered by is certain after-market bodies that are close, but not exact, in following the vintage pattern. For example, I own a partsocaster with a 1986 Fender 62 (a USA aftermarket vintage neck with the medallion on the back of the headstock) and a Warmoth alder body. The guitar plays and sounds great, but I can see from across a room that the left side of the body is narrower (by about 1/4") than it should be and that the horn is slightly misshaped. At first, I didn't notice it , but after visiting sites like this and reading the Strat book, the discrepancy became apparent, and I even measured it against my MIJ 1954 to verify that it was "off." It does bug me, because it just doesn't look right, but I've played it for the last 10 years anyway. And in the end, it doesn't matter how it looks, but how it plays (although I was trying to build an authentic repro on the cheap).

 

[57or62]

B. Hefner is another.....

This guy brags all over the place (VG ads and Tonequest report) about how his company is pretty much the only co. around that truly has Leo's specs down to a tee. Well guess what, I ordered a 50's style body and the control cavity was routed for a 60's style body (little shelf thing). I'd say that is a little off spec. Not to mention that he takes all your money up front (including shipping!), and tells you it will be 8 to 10 weeks. Well it has been nearly 6 months, and still no body. The reason I found out about the off-spec route is because I called to check on the status and asked about the route. I have a somewhat high degree of respect for the tonequest report, but they gave B. Hefner a big fluff piece article praising his work with only having him refret a relic tele. I believe Bernie knew the instrument being refretted was for tonequest so I'm sure he turned it around quick and had his most qualified tech do the job. I guess I should reserve further comment until I actually recieve the body.

 

[T-bone Tone]

What you must bear in mind is the simple fact that the contoured body varied quite a bit on 50's and early sixties strats. Fender used a big belt sander, and, depending who was using it, the size of the back 'crescent' relief, and the front angle forearm relief were approximate to the spec at the time.

The outline, however, to me, seems spot on with the new guitars fender are making. My friend has a '57 and I have a '65, and the vintage re-iisues seem exact. Anyone?

 

[JBandtheSalts]

agree

id have to agree with tbone, you do have to consider that no two vintage strats have the same exact contours, im sure fender took the contours from one specific instroment and duplicated it on all of the reissues...

 

[genelovesjez]

I had an American Standard Strat and a CIJ '68 RI Strat at the same time (until I sold the AmStd), and there was no comparison in the body shaping. The CIJ had what I consider to be the vintage contours to a T. The AmStd, on the other hand was less contoured, and more irregular. If you have an opportunity, you might want to check out any Japanese Strats you can find.

 

[Troels]

Re: agree

id have to agree with tbone, you do have to consider that no two vintage strats have the same exact contours, im sure fender took the contours from one specific instroment and duplicated it on all of the reissues...

Wether you aggree with tbone or not you are wrong - and so is he is. In the 50s and 60s Fender guitars was routed with routers following a template screwed right into the back of the body (mind the two plugs on back of old Fenders). Therefore they were pretty much the same alltogether. And you actually need sanding quite a lot to remove just small amounts of stone hard wood such as ash. Problems began in the early 70s when Fender went to CAD/CAM systems. For a period they used both methods side by side in the early 70s and you can tell (if experienced which I am in this matter) which one is CAD/CAM routed and which is routed after a template - especially when talking Telecaster - that went right down out of shape! I don't think Fender USA has ever since hit the blueprints for the early guitars correctly - and certainly not with the new American Series either. The first Squires - those made in the early 80's in Japan are among the closest shapewise.

Guitars may differe slightly in shape and body outlines. But why are we forced to buy $5.000 guitars with strange imperfections in the outline arches onm body horns and so on? Fender Japan could do this 25 years ago - Fender USA still can't...

 

[Kevin]

Re: agree

Wether you aggree with tbone or not you are wrong - and so is he is.

And so are you....

Speaking as someone who makes bodies from "templates screwed directly to the body," I can say that no two bodies I make are identical. Close, yes, but not identical. When you start doing strat contours, it gets even more inconsistent.

Things you have to remember are that templates wear over time, and the amount of pressure that you extert against the template guide (with the template) will effect the finished product. Also, there are the occasional chips that are not serious enough to discard a body for -- they can be sanded out smoothly; to do so, however, will alter the profile slightly.

Modern CNC machines can spit out consistent copies to an almost-infinite degree, assuming that the cutter heads stay sharp. That's because a human is not guiding the machine.

Anytime you introduce a human into the equation, you'll get variability from one sample to the next; if you use multiple humans, you'll have even more variability. That's not conjecture, BTW, that's established fact; within-subject variability is consistently less than between-subject variability.

So. Were the early bodies fairly conistent? Yes. But not to the degree that they are now. Did contour depth and size change over time? Yes, but it also varied somewhat from piece to piece back in the 50's.

The modern US vintage reissues, as stated above, are an "average" of several guitars, made from careful measurements of those guitars. They probably are not exact with any single guitar from the 50's or 60's, but they are "representative" of that era -- and a far sight closer than the 70's strats were.

BTW, my templates are made from a '55 tele. I have tracings of a Broadcaster and a '63 Esquire, and none of those shapes are an exact match with any of the others. Hal brought his '64 over for me to refin, and guess what? It's different, too...

 

[RickC]

however they were made, if you've spent time with a lot of pre-CBS Strats (I have) it becomes fairly obvious what a "correct" one looks like.

The original US vintage re-issues missed it by miles, and let's not even get into the neck contours. Starting in the late 90's, the US re-issues got much closer.

And curiously (or perhaps not ), the MIJ re-issues have had "correct" body shapes and contours from the very beginning, sometime in the 80's.

/rick

 

[Troels]

You might be right about the very early 50s - but in the end of the 50s, throughout the 60s and in the early 70s Fender bodies are pretty consistent in shape. The templates were made of hardened steel and the routers drill was guided by a wheel - not much wear there (but some of course). You are right that todays bodies are 100% similar in shape - but (and that was my point) unfortunately a wrong shape. Take a looke at the bass side body horn ... look carefully at the arch - and you will bump and inch or so from the strap knob towards the waist. Take any modern Fender guitar - Custom Shop or whatever - thay all have that wrong (and ugly) detail. And my question is: Whjy don't they make it right? They did in Japan (Gen Gakki) 25 years ago... Troels