Page 4 of 4

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:16 pm
by Mechanical Birds
I’ve looked at the pics in this thread every day for like 2 weeks. I want a XII so bad because of it!

The only one I ever had was a Danoblaster 12 string that felt like garbage that I bought for $150. I was able to trade it for a Fiesta Red Jagstang with a guy who used to be my best friend. So that was cool - ended up losing the Jagstang to a pawn shop, though :(

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 3:42 pm
by alexpigment
Paul-T wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:00 am
How so?

The body is produced with a particular shape; the guitar is returned to that shape, therefore more original. The replaced area is admittedly a separate piece of alder - but most of these instruments were produced with bodies of two or even three piece of alder in any case.

The guitar will be more desirable to more people for being closer to the original spec.
As I said, I re-read the thread and saw that the owner requested the repair, so basically my comments are pointless. You should probably ignore them :) But since you ask, there's a value grey area here - "repaired" vs "all original with purely cosmetic issues under the pickguard" - I don't think there's a clear winner there in terms of value. Keep in mind that even a refret affects value for vintage guitars - and that has a *positive* impact on the playability of a guitar. The issue here has no effect on playability or even cosmetics in the usual sense. At any rate, I really don't understand why this was a big enough deal to mess with, especially since it requires a lot of precise work and will most likely not look 100% original after it's done. I'm bookending my statement by saying that my comments are pointless because the owner requested the repair. I wish the OP good luck and look forward to seeing the final result.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:56 pm
by CROSS_guitars
alexpigment wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 3:42 pm
Paul-T wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:00 am
How so?

The body is produced with a particular shape; the guitar is returned to that shape, therefore more original. The replaced area is admittedly a separate piece of alder - but most of these instruments were produced with bodies of two or even three piece of alder in any case.

The guitar will be more desirable to more people for being closer to the original spec.
As I said, I re-read the thread and saw that the owner requested the repair, so basically my comments are pointless. You should probably ignore them :) But since you ask, there's a value grey area here - "repaired" vs "all original with purely cosmetic issues under the pickguard" - I don't think there's a clear winner there in terms of value. Keep in mind that even a refret affects value for vintage guitars - and that has a *positive* impact on the playability of a guitar. The issue here has no effect on playability or even cosmetics in the usual sense. At any rate, I really don't understand why this was a big enough deal to mess with, especially since it requires a lot of precise work and will most likely not look 100% original after it's done. I'm bookending my statement by saying that my comments are pointless because the owner requested the repair. I wish the OP good luck and look forward to seeing the final result.
Fair points.
I suggested the patch up to the owner, so it was my idea. I didn't really explain the process to him. But the chizzle work was messy so it was necessary to clean it up before gluing the new bit of wood in.

I understand it won't increase or decrease the value of the guitar. I think aesthetically, it's the best decision for the guitar. The value was somewhat compromised anyway because it has had some wiring repairs. I think the Capacitor had been replaced etc.

Would the Egyptian Sphinx lose its value if someone stuck a nose back on it?

Really the desire to "restore" it, came from a creative point of view. It's fun to fix guitars. I don't see it as a waste of time, or unnecessary work.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:40 pm
by Sonichris
CROSS_guitars wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:56 pm


Fair points.
I suggested the patch up to the owner, so it was my idea. I didn't really explain the process to him. But the chizzle work was messy so it was necessary to clean it up before gluing the new bit of wood in.

I understand it won't increase or decrease the value of the guitar. I think aesthetically, it's the best decision for the guitar. The value was somewhat compromised anyway because it has had some wiring repairs. I think the Capacitor had been replaced etc.

Would the Egyptian Sphinx lose its value if someone stuck a nose back on it?

Really the desire to "restore" it, came from a creative point of view. It's fun to fix guitars. I don't see it as a waste of time, or unnecessary work.
Agree 100%. It's a cool fix for an unfortunate modification. And, it's much more difficult to pull off well (as you have done) than most realize. I think it was a totally worthwhile venture. And, guitars are, indeed fun to return to their closer to original status.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:48 pm
by CROSS_guitars
Sonichris wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:40 pm
CROSS_guitars wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:56 pm


Fair points.
I suggested the patch up to the owner, so it was my idea. I didn't really explain the process to him. But the chizzle work was messy so it was necessary to clean it up before gluing the new bit of wood in.

I understand it won't increase or decrease the value of the guitar. I think aesthetically, it's the best decision for the guitar. The value was somewhat compromised anyway because it has had some wiring repairs. I think the Capacitor had been replaced etc.

Would the Egyptian Sphinx lose its value if someone stuck a nose back on it?

Really the desire to "restore" it, came from a creative point of view. It's fun to fix guitars. I don't see it as a waste of time, or unnecessary work.
Agree 100%. It's a cool fix for an unfortunate modification. And, it's much more difficult to pull off well (as you have done) than most realize. I think it was a totally worthwhile venture. And, guitars are, indeed fun to return to their closer to original status.
Thanks,
yeah, and also, I don't think I would ever buy a guitar knowing it has been hacked up inside. I would buy one which has been repaired well.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:36 pm
by CROSS_guitars
I threw a few coats of sanding sealer on it today. It's not ideal weather but I used a heat gun in between coats.

It's amazing how well Yellow food dye works as a stain. It's pretty much an exact match.

Image

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:29 pm
by CROSS_guitars
Okay.
So it is pretty much there. Not even sure if I'll do anymore to it.

Image

Image

With Shielding...

Image

Image

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:21 am
by alexpigment
I will say it was a nice touch to spray the top right edge with a very slight about of black.

Would the nitro be hard to match? I don’t really know the availability of vintage accurate nitro to be honest.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:36 am
by CROSS_guitars
alexpigment wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:21 am
I will say it was a nice touch to spray the top right edge with a very slight about of black.

Would the nitro be hard to match? I don’t really know the availability of vintage accurate nitro to be honest.
It's easy enough to mix. Problem is, I don't have any red paint on hand. Otherwise I would mix it up with some clear and spray it in faintly.

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:03 pm
by Sonichris
Really nice repair!

Re: Fender XII 1966 sunburst, tort

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:34 am
by FEXII
I agree it is a really nice repair.