40's style Gibson 400 Black rear headstock/neck pinstripe, with Dingotone

[Tweaky]

Well there you go, that's the funny thing about the internet, differing information on the same topic.

Have look yourself, just Google 'flame maple less stable for guitar neck building' and you'll get plenty to read.
https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr...+neck+building

Not that I have any first hand knowledge, it just came up in a search result one day when I was looking at getting a replacement Strat neck custom built.

It certainly looks nice anyway, and any guitar built with a flame maple neck would most likely out live it's owner anyway , so I suppose it's all moot in the end.

As for building a neck from scratch...well I honestly think I could do it, if I had the correct tools, and more importantly, the space to do it in....I envy you Dingobass, being able to quietly work away building beautiful creations out of raw materials, then after completion, being able to stand back, and having the satisfaction of being able to say, I BUILT THAT !

Is there a sort of heart break when they leave the workshop?
I imagine there would be, if it was me.

As for doing the wanted finish on the ES-3, it won't happen.
There is just too much work to be done to the neck to make it look the part....the most problematic would be to add girth to the rear of the headstock, down towards near the nut, reshaping the taper of the volute, so it matches a Gibson...I'll post comparison photos of the ES-3 and my Gibson headstock when I start my ES-3 build, so you will see what I mean.....as the kit stands as a replica of a Gibson....it's had too much material taken off around the end of the headstock/tapering to nut....again, you'll see the difference in the photos .

Don't think this is a complaint, it's just a observation, as I have original guitars at hand to directly compare them against.

[Gavin1393]

Hi Teeaky, as mentioned previously the factory would be breaching copyright to make exact replicas of these famous brand of guitars. Hence we expect that there will be differences as our models are only based on these famous models.

[dingobass]

Yeah, it is hard to let them go but they go to peeps who treasure them so thats a consolation..

I hear what you are saying about the kit necks vs the real deal.
It comes down to ease of manufacture as well as steering clear of any potential heat from the big name companies... They do protect their intellectual property with vigor..
Gibson, Rickenbacker and co spend more money on this than they do on R&D these days... Hence nothing new other than a few fancy gizmos has come out of their factories for the past two decades or more..
Pity that really, Gibson could have at the very least fixed the design fault with the LP, SG & FV headstocks breaking on a regular basis.... But then guys like me would lose a lot of repair work so I shouldn't complain

[Tweaky]

Hi Teeaky, as mentioned previously the factory would be breaching copyright to make exact replicas of these famous brand of guitars. Hence we expect that there will be differences as our models are only based on these famous models.

Just a suggestion.
It seems you can "Partially" get away with copying certain design elements, without breach of copyright, it seems the Headstock being the problem.
Since headstock templates are available online to be easily downloaded to replicate the END of the headstock [which are the copyrighted portions], the need to choose between the end of headstock [copyright] and headstock to nut tapering/shaping has, IMHO, been skewered the wrong way.
My ES-1 Kit neck has the classic [copyrighted] Gibson end of neck Tulip shape, but differs at the neck joint....as a guitar builder, which is more important?, the neck/body joint, or legal troubles because of headstock copying?....fix the neck joint, leave the headstock flat so purchasers can sort it themselves......[neck joint problem with my kit]...I'll post photos.

The ES-3 has a flat headstock end [so design away], but the taper of the neck differers considerably from the headstock to the nut.
I don't think that has been copyrighted, as it's a matter of structural integrity of the neck [I know, Gibson and Neck headstock structural integrity shouldn't be used in the same sentence ]
The ES-3 Kit has one particular bigger problem than that though [actually several-needs a construction rethink as a kit] .....I'll take some photos and show you....it is particularly bad, and quite frankly, I'm surprised it's sent out as is for people to build.
[It's where the body meets the neck at the LOW E side, there is a gap of about 1/1.5mm ]
I used some lateral thinking, and have thought about doing some slight Internal modifications, and glue a small block of wood under the guitars top, so it can be clamped against the fixed neck, when it comes time to do so, thereby closing that space....there is plenty of space to fit a small clamp inside the body that would do the job

[dingobass]

Just a guess until you post pics but the gap is there to give some wriggle room in order to ensure the neck and bridge can be lined up.

Also, for the price you kinda have to expect to do some cosmetic adjustments.. Its all part of the fun of building a kit Guitar

[Gavin1393]

The ES-3 Kit has one particular bigger problem than that though [actually several-needs a construction rethink as a kit] .....I'll take some photos and show you....it is particularly bad, and quite frankly, I'm surprised it's sent out as is for people to build.
[It's where the body meets the neck at the LOW E side, there is a gap of about 1/1.5mm ]
I used some lateral thinking, and have thought about doing some slight Internal modifications, and glue a small block of wood under the guitars top, so it can be clamped against the fixed neck, when it comes time to do so, thereby closing that space....there is plenty of space to fit a small clamp inside the body that would do the job

Tweaky, I'm really not sure how much experience you have with building guitars - particularly those that come in kit form. (I'm not referring to the forum user who puts the guitar together but the manufacturer who provides it).
But for your benefit and perhaps those who perhaps are less aware of the manufacturing process there are some things that need to be taken into account and investigated before suggesting a kit has a problem with its design.

There is the key issue of humidity to consider. With a hollow body this is even more important since wood continues to 'breathe' and adjust to the humidity of the geographical area that it finds itself in. For this reason serious builders of guitars will always try and control the humidity around them at between 40 - 50%. This is essential when gluing up a guitar too as if the humidity causes the wood to expand too much the glued up joints will weaken and tear apart. You will often see this on an acoustic guitar where the soundboard has 'split' right down the middle line. An acoustic guitar/ hollow body built in Mt Tamborine in Queensland will 'bulge' when it arrives in Perth Western Australia unless the builder is extremely careful with the build process and controls the humidity while building.
So, when building a guitar for a different climates there has to be wider tolerances, especially when unprotected (unpainted) wood is being shipped all over the world. Since we know the wood can be affected by the humidity and typically swell or shrink slightly, you will find that by design there is a small gap between the neck pocket and the guitar neck when you dry fit.
I am currently in the final stages of building the ES-3 and the gap you refer to was there initially on my guitar, however, I know that this is not a problem because I'm painting the guitar and I will be gluing in the neck with Hide Glue. This is the next point, once the guitar is painted, the thickness of the applied coats combined with the Hide Glue will usually completely cover up that gap. Of course when I do apply my glue to fit the neck to the body I will make sure the humidity is right otherwise I can expect cracks to appear unless I fluked the right humidity when I glued up.

[dingobass]

I agree with the Gavmiester.
Humidity is a massive issue when building and finishing a Guitar.

During our hot and dry Perth summers I have an evaporative cooler running in the workshop in an effort to maintain that magic 40-50% humidity... This can be a challenge at times...

Then I have the drama of lowering the humidity to 20-30% during winter before I apply any form of finish, whether it is DT or Nitro...

Ergo, with our kits (we have sold thousands of them) there are tolerances built in at the factory to allow for the home builder, regardless of location, to successfully build their Guitar.

I am sure that by the time you get to the final construction stage that you will find everything will fit together in a satisfactory way.

[Maddogm]

So I should get in the good books of my mate who works in a warehouse that can control temperature and humidity from 0% to 100% (to the point that they can create fog) :P

[Tweaky]

Perhaps I have come across as too opinionated,.....the internet seems to highlight & twist what was originally a question, into an opinion.
A loathsome effect.

Please wait until I take photos and post them before any further replies in this thread.....should be in the next day or so.