Mustang neck carve 1960’s vs. 1970’s

[deejaid]

For those that have owned both a 1960’s era Mustang as well as a 1970’s era Mustang, how do the neck shapes compare to each other? I have a 1969 stamped B width neck and it is very meaty measuring .92” at both the 1st and 12th frets. Are the later 1970’s necks, in particular the maple fretboard varieties, just as thick as the older rosewood board necks?

I plan on doing another Mustang build and had hoped to use a maple neck but want something as close to my current Mustang neck as possible.

[sir h c]

I recently picked up a 1976 Mustang with a maple neck. It doesn't seem much different from my 1966 and 1964 Mustangs.

[deejaid]

I recently picked up a 1976 Mustang with a maple neck. It doesn't seem much different from my 1966 and 1964 Mustangs.

Good to know.

Thank you!

[Dieca]

I don't have two mustangs but I can compare my 70's Mustang to my 60's Jag for you. Both necks are the same nut width.

My 1972 mustang neck measures 22.10mm (0.87 inches) at the first fret, increasing 24.42mm (0.96 inches) at the twelfth. It has a nice and chunky feel which is pretty consistent all the way up the neck. It has noticeable shoulders which I think feel great, especially when fretting with the thumb. It feels to me most like a U shape in the picture below

My 1964 Jaguar measure 21.15mm (0.83 Inches) at the first rising to 24.75 (0.97 inches) at the twelfth. It does feel like it gets noticeably fatter as you move up the neck. It also has considerably less shoulder when compared the mustang, this makes it feel like a much smaller neck than the Mustang, corresponds most to a C shape in the picture below.

[Danley]

I have a ‘78 Bronco neck and a ‘66 Mustang neck; the Mustang neck is thinner and flatter-backed, the Bronco neck is quite a bit thicker and has more of a soft V.

[Paolo_ray]

I used to own a '66 Mustang and I recall the neck being pretty fat. I have a '76 maple necked Mustang now and it's a slim D shape. I've also owned a '78 Musicmaster, that thing had a proper baseball bat neck.

[Dieca]

I think that you do get some significant variances from neck to neck, even on two of the same guitars that rolled off the production line next to each other. I get the impression from the vintage examples I've played when I've had the chance that there is sort of a ballpark that was aimed for (generally thinner or fatter for a certain time or model) but the tolerances were fairly wide. I think that the average neck on a certain year might be thinner or fatter than others but you will still find examples fairly far from this average.

I don't know how hand shaped the necks were or what the production methods were in the pre-CBS and CBS years, maybe somebody can chime in.

I also wonder if the 24-inch scale necks were not shaped with a specific model in mind and this was just determined by the stamp and decal, a neck for a jaguar could easily have ended up on a mustang on a different day, or perhaps there were guidelines that different shapes be designated for different models. Does anybody know?

[Danley]

Jaguar necks would have been a bit special, as far as the binding/blocks during the years Mustangs were also made. I wouldn’t be surprised if neck profile is just up to how the machine operator felt that day.

[Wil_66]

Jaguar necks would have been a bit special, as far as the binding/blocks during the years Mustangs were also made. I wouldn’t be surprised if neck profile is just up to how the machine operator felt that day.

I think you've got the right idea with that... I have 2 Duo Sonic II necks, and 1 Musicmaster II neck. All 3 are marked B width and from 1966 and all 3 feel different. The Musicmaster neck is more of a U shape, one of the Duo Sonic's is a thin D shape, and the other Duo Sonic is somewhere between a C and a U shape. I don't think there was much in the way of a jig for shaping the back of the necks back then and there was a lot of variance in the necks depending on how hungover the person making it was that day

[Wil_66]

Jaguar necks would have been a bit special, as far as the binding/blocks during the years Mustangs were also made. I wouldn’t be surprised if neck profile is just up to how the machine operator felt that day.

I think you've got the right idea with that... I have 2 Duo Sonic II necks, and 1 Musicmaster II neck. All 3 are 24" scale. marked B width and from 1966 and all 3 feel different. The Musicmaster neck is more of a U shape, one of the Duo Sonic's is a thin D shape, and the other Duo Sonic is somewhere between a C and a U shape. I don't think there was much in the way of a jig for shaping the back of the necks back then and there was a lot of variance in the necks depending on how hungover the person making it was that day

[deejaid]

Jaguar necks would have been a bit special, as far as the binding/blocks during the years Mustangs were also made. I wouldn’t be surprised if neck profile is just up to how the machine operator felt that day.

This is probably true, no real specific specs, just general tolerances to be within.


I started this thread as I thought maybe I should build another Mustang, but maybe this is the realization that I have the perfect one already and I should be content.

[Con-Tiki!]

at one point i owned both a 66 and a 75 mustang.
66 was round and thick, 75 felt like a modern mim strat

i have no idea if that's typical, but that was my experience