That seems to be about bang on trend then, well done!marginwalker wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2024 3:00 amThanks dude! Yeah I absolutely love the way the tort looks!
And yeah no problem at all with sharing! I traded in a 78 SG Special ($1500) and paid $5600 including taxes. The sales tax is kinda crazy in Oakland at 10.25% lol. The guitar was tagged $7200 in the shop and they had it for like $8049 on Reverb
1962 Jaguar - finally!!
- JSett
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 9097
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:33 pm
- Location: Old Hampshire, Old England
Re: 1962 Jaguar - finally!!
Silly Rabbit, don't you know scooped mids are for kids?
- marginwalker
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:06 pm
Re: 1962 Jaguar - finally!!
Thanks I’m feeling pretty good about it! Tho a local 71 CAR Jag with a maple B&B neck just popped up on my reverb feed and part of me wants to see if they’ll trade lolJSett wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2024 4:13 amThat seems to be about bang on trend then, well done!marginwalker wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2024 3:00 amThanks dude! Yeah I absolutely love the way the tort looks!
And yeah no problem at all with sharing! I traded in a 78 SG Special ($1500) and paid $5600 including taxes. The sales tax is kinda crazy in Oakland at 10.25% lol. The guitar was tagged $7200 in the shop and they had it for like $8049 on Reverb
- crazyzeke
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 5076
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:19 pm
- Location: West Sussex, England
Re: 1962 Jaguar - finally!!
RockStarNick wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2024 9:22 amThe wear on the neck is just perfect. I always love seeing real-deal play wear, and how unique it is to the original player and playing style, as opposed to the the more generic "worn all over" look of modern relics.
Also interesting that the back of the neck is relatively natural in color, no reddish/amber.
Both good observations, especially the first one. As soon as I saw the played-in neck versus the overall excellent condition, I was like "this is a beautiful example of a players guitar, used but not abused" because too little playwear on a vintage piece usually means it isn't very playable.
marginwalker wrote: ↑Sun May 12, 2024 10:17 pmIs it possible the guitar was assembled in 63 using some 62 parts? The nut is the only thing I’m certain is a replacement.
It's Fender, so yes, absolutely. That'd be the "grab parts from anywhere as you build" era so you'd get mashups of different years sometimes, totally normal.
If you do disassemble for more inspection it might be measuring the pickup output, if you can. I'd guess both the original and replacement pickups would be vintage-correct 6k-7k DC resistance range but you never know.
Very pretty guitar. You could easily have paid more for less, by which I mean a more beat up one for a few more thousand than you actually paid, and obviously still way cheaper than any good Strat from the same year so a good deal, especially as you traded in instruments you probably weren't playing much anyway. Better to have fewer guitars that get played more that you get super comfy with.
2003 CIJ Fender Jaguar, sunburst (SJAG-3n neck, SHR-1b bridge, 500K lead circuit pots/speed knobs, Mastery bridge, Buzz Stop, Squier JM JM vibrato plate, modified whammy bar)
2022 MIM Fender Meteora, cosmic jade (top mounted input jack added)
2022 MIM Fender Meteora, cosmic jade (top mounted input jack added)