Saylor Starcaster Build
- danp3man
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:19 am
- Location: PRescott AZ
Saylor Starcaster Build
Bought a Saylor Starcaster style body a while back, and am looking at starting the project now after moving cross country from Arizona to Kansas. Now that we're finally getting settled and I've built a suitable workshop/craft area for my projects, I started playing around with the parts and body- the Warmoth Mooncaster neck is a good fit, although I modded the shape of the headstock and "swoop" to more closely match the Fender Starcaster shape. What I'm scratching my head over is wiring the pots and getting them, with the wiring harness, into the body. Because of the thickness of the body top wood, I need to use long shaft pots, which are pretty difficult to maneuver through the cavities and get through the holes. I could make an opening in the back like a Les Paul which would make life a lot easier, but I really want to keep the back unmolested. The short shaft pots are easier to manipulate, but barely get a tread showing. Any suggestions? Also thinking of going with 500K pots instead of the 1 Meg pots the Starcaster uses- undecided here. Any thoughts on this? Thanks!
- hpr_hpr
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 9:48 am
Re: Saylor Starcaster Build
What does 'barely showing' actually mean . . . as long at there is enough thread for the nut to completely engage there is enough . . . is not, you can always draw a 1" circle (big enough for the nut . . . check dimensions) with the hole as the center, remove 1/16" or so of wood inside the circle and voila, short shaft pots fit . . .
I believe that I determined that the maximum thickness for short shaft pots is 1/4" in my build.
500K instead of 1M pots will bleed a little more of the high frequencies to ground . . . not sure if that would make a 'hearable difference' but an oscilloscope can measure it . . . for a somewhat 'warmer' sound (again if you can hear it).
I believe that I determined that the maximum thickness for short shaft pots is 1/4" in my build.
500K instead of 1M pots will bleed a little more of the high frequencies to ground . . . not sure if that would make a 'hearable difference' but an oscilloscope can measure it . . . for a somewhat 'warmer' sound (again if you can hear it).
When thinking about any advice given always ask yourself "why would (s)he know more than I do".
- danp3man
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:19 am
- Location: PRescott AZ
Re: Saylor Starcaster Build
hpr_hpr wrote:What does 'barely showing' actually mean . . . as long at there is enough thread for the nut to completely engage there is enough . . . is not, you can always draw a 1" circle (big enough for the nut . . . check dimensions) with the hole as the center, remove 1/16" or so of wood inside the circle and voila, short shaft pots fit . . .
I believe that I determined that the maximum thickness for short shaft pots is 1/4" in my build.
500K instead of 1M pots will bleed a little more of the high frequencies to ground . . . not sure if that would make a 'hearable difference' but an oscilloscope can measure it . . . for a somewhat 'warmer' sound (again if you can hear it).
Thanks hpr-hpr-
Yeah, the short shaft threads don't give enough threads showing to give the nut purchase, especially if you put a washer in the mix. I can barely maneuver a long shaft pot to the holes and get it through, but foresee nightmare scenarios if trying to get five pots wired together threaded through the pickup opening and body void to the proper holes. Probably not a problem with an original Fender Starcaster body, as it is an arched top and probably thinner top wood- more room to move stuff, probably the short shaft pots would work as well there. This must just be a challenge for the Saylor Starcaster style bodies- I'm hoping for some input from those who have done one of these builds to see how the dealt with it. I may have to go with your good suggestion of removing some wood from the top in a circle where the pot shafts come through- wouldn't show when the knobs are installed, much better than cutting an access hole in the back of the guitar ala a Les Paul or similar! Thanks for the input!
- PixMix
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 6:04 pm
Re: Saylor Starcaster Build
If you have a drill press and if the top is thick enough, I would consider using a spade bit to thin down the top only in the area that would contact the washer and the hex nut, and would be covered by the knob. The 7/16 would probably work best for a 3/8 hex nut. I would also practice a few times on a scrap piece of thin plywood or a material of similar thickness, just to get the hang of it and test fit the pot, wash and the nut.
- danp3man
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:19 am
- Location: PRescott AZ
Re: Saylor Starcaster Build
PixMix wrote:If you have a drill press and if the top is thick enough, I would consider using a spade bit to thin down the top only in the area that would contact the washer and the hex nut, and would be covered by the knob. The 7/16 would probably work best for a 3/8 hex nut. I would also practice a few times on a scrap piece of thin plywood or a material of similar thickness, just to get the hang of it and test fit the pot, wash and the nut.
I do have a drill press, but should probably invest in some new, higher quality spade bits- my old ones have been through a lot doing construction and remodeling type work, and have seen better days I'm sure! I don't want to bung up the recesses, so a sharp, new bit is in order- I'll invest in a few of the proper size range, maybe I could find a graduated set- I'm sure they will come in handy for other fine work. I think the top is plenty thick enough, so this seems to be the best way to go. One of those weird challenges- not as complicated as building a ship in a bottle perhaps, but it looked pretty daunting trying to thread the long shaft pots being wired together through the pickup cavity- the short shaft pots should be much easier to maneuver through the void. I'll give it a go! Great suggestion!