So tell me if you think this is a bad idea.
A Floyd, in an already skinny guitar body (36mm front to back give or take), with a recessed timber cover.
In my mental arithmetic, the floyd can be sat a little proud of the body, with a minimal recess rout for its action on the body front. I sourced a Trem with the shortest block i could get (32mm, still a heavy F$*^er compared to the fixed bridge that was on originally). Through mud maps and sketching things out i had figured that i could JUST squeeze it in.
Then paranoia kicked in, attempts at setting up the unit in a dummy configuration to estimate where springs would sit, where things would reach when in action, and whether the claw would impact on the inside of what would be a VERY thin trem cover (Because all trem covers should be recessed and what is recessed should be flush to surface (thanks for that OCD, love ya really)). No problem on a standard width 42mm/1.625" or 44.4mm/1.750" guitar body, but did I mention the FrankenWashie is only 36mm thick at its core?
So I ended up making a couple of trem covers, the "Yep mate, no worries she'll be right" version and the "OH shi*t, oh Sh!t, it's not going to fit" jumbo version, See below.
Aesthetically the thin cover wins hands down, it remains to be seen if it will actually work. Functionally i have no doubt that the Jumbo one will work, but it is not the best look. I did what i could to try and contour it into the rest of the body but it still looks off. I can't really go any flatter with it due to this:
the whole reason it is a fat as it is, like i said Paranoia kicked in.
What do we reckon Peeps? if it were your guitar, would you be happy with the jumbo? would you prefer the flush mount? Would you not be silly enough to try and put a floyd rose in such a thin body? Opinions, options and critique all welcomed.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by SIMpleONe89
