Bigsby for a 330

[wittyair]

I told her she needed to use protection.
The B3........definitely not the right tool for the job......I'm thinkin B7.

[tennis_nick]

I told her she needed to use protection.
The B3........definitely not the right tool for the job......I'm thinkin B7.

Too long. the Break angle would be too sharp, and would probably cause tuning instability even when not using the Bigsby.

[libratune]

Craig, I don't think the B-7 will work for you. Here's pics of a B-7 on a 335 side-by-side to a garden variety 330.

330 TP and Gib 335 B-7

330 TP and Gib 335 B-7 close

The distance from the bottom of the 335 to the top roller of the B-7 is 6 1/2" (7" if you count the "nose" on the right by the arm), with the distance to the 335 bridge being 10". On the Rick, however, the distance from the bottom of the 330 to the bridge is 7". I don't think the B-7 would work.

I believe the B-5 is the only viable Bigsby option for a 300-series Rick.

Too bad about the screws, though.

[paologregorio]

Craig, I don't think the B-7 will work for you. Here's pics of a B-7 on a 335 side-by-side to a garden variety 330.

002.JPG

003.JPG

The distance from the bottom of the 335 to the top roller of the B-7 is 6 1/2" (7" if you count the "nose" on the right by the arm), with the distance to the 335 bridge being 10". On the Rick, however, the distance from the bottom of the 330 to the bridge is 7". I don't think the B-7 would work.

I believe the B-5 is the only viable Bigsby option for a 300-series Rick.

Too bad about the screws, though.

Why don't you like the B3 Craig? Are you concerned with sustain? I can't see how the B3 would sustain less than the standard "R" tailpiece.

I mentioned that the B7 would be too long on page 1 of this thread.

The B5s as mounted in the photos on page one of this thread actually don't look too bad, but there's the whole drilled hole issue. I've seen pics of a RIC factory mounted B5 from a 70s or 80s model in which the B5 was mounted much closer to the bridge, not in the ramp area of the body. I'd still prefer a B3 as it requires no holes to be drilled in the top of the guitar body.

[libratune]

Stan provided us with a photo of a 340 with a B-3 mounted.

Craig says the B-3 won't do the job.

Paul thinks the B-3 should work.

Has anyone actually played a 300 series Rick with a B-3 on it?

If so, what's the scoop?

[paologregorio]

Scotty, I think, but he won't be up for another hour or so.

I'm not sure what the issue is wrt "deflection angle"; none of my Accent vibrato units have much of any deflection angle and they work just fine.

I'm sure the B3-equipped 340 works just fine-who would mount a B3 on their guitar, have it not work, and then take photos of their mistake?

[wittyair]

My guitar tech said the deflection angle just wouldn't work.....in fact the strings were actually
up off the bridge when the B3 was installed.......looks like we might have to go with the B5 but
it would be interesting to hear from anyone who has had success with the B3.

[jingle_jangle]

My guitar tech said the deflection angle just wouldn't work.....in fact the strings were actually
up off the bridge when the B3 was installed.......looks like we might have to go with the B5 but
it would be interesting to hear from anyone who has had success with the B3.

My remarks are based upon photos I have seen of a B3 installed on a 330, backed with measurements I made for a customer who was thinking of doing this. B5s work well because of the tension bar. All the rest save the B3 are simply too long.

Here's one of the photos, of Martin Crawford's 340:

The string height coming off a B3 is .700", according to my notes, and the height of a Rick bridge in the center of its vertical travel is .825, which leaves a .125 height difference. However, I have not measured the break angle, which of course is a product of the actual length of the B3 and how it sits on the guitar. The ramp on the guitar body complicates things, but is more likely to improve the angle than worsen it.

...and the photo proves it's doable.

[Scastles]

My guitar tech said the deflection angle just wouldn't work.....in fact the strings were actually
up off the bridge when the B3 was installed.......looks like we might have to go with the B5 but
it would be interesting to hear from anyone who has had success with the B3.

My remarks are based upon photos I have seen of a B3 installed on a 330, backed with measurements I made for a customer who was thinking of doing this. B5s work well because of the tension bar. All the rest save the B3 are simply too long.

Here's one of the photos, of Martin Crawford's 340:

446356149_40e2a5a64c.jpg

The string height coming off a B3 is .700", according to my notes, and the height of a Rick bridge in the center of its vertical travel is .825, which leaves a .125 height difference. However, I have not measured the break angle, which of course is a product of the actual length of the B3 and how it sits on the guitar. The ramp on the guitar body complicates things, but is more likely to improve the angle than worsen it.

...and the photo proves it's doable.

Bit of a twist. This link shows a close-up of Martin's Bigsby. The caption he wrote below it says it's a vintage B7. Ooops.

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/v ... =12usmhab7

[wittyair]

The B7 has the second roller bar on it so it sure doesn't look like a B7 to me.

[Scastles]

The B7 has the second roller bar on it so it sure doesn't look like a B7 to me.

I guess he thought what he bought was a B7.

[libratune]

My guitar tech said the deflection angle just wouldn't work.....in fact the strings were actually
up off the bridge when the B3 was installed.......looks like we might have to go with the B5 but
it would be interesting to hear from anyone who has had success with the B3.

The string height coming off a B3 is .700", according to my notes, and the height of a Rick bridge in the center of its vertical travel is .825, which leaves a .125 height difference. However, I have not measured the break angle, which of course is a product of the actual length of the B3 and how it sits on the guitar. The ramp on the guitar body complicates things, but is more likely to improve the angle than worsen it ...and the photo proves it's doable.

Here's another photo of Martin Crawford's B3 installation that (somewhat) shows the angle of the strings coming off the B3.

340 B3 + bridge

I note that, though the angle is slight, it is still an angle; however, I also note that the bridge appears to be cranked up at least 1/2 way. As the bridge goes down, the angle obviously decreases. So the feasiblity of the B3 mount may depend to some extent on the bridge height of the particular guitar.

[jingle_jangle]

B7 does have the roller bar; Martin is mistaken in his comments. Note that I measured the bridge height with the bridge halfway up in my post above. A bridge set on its stops is going to give problems. But, then, a bridge that far down also indicates a neck reset is imminent. This is much more common on vintage Ricks than on newer models. I'd venture a guess that the older the Rick, the less likely it will be modified with a Bigsby (exception being the old 325s, which came with a B5).

[wittyair]

The saga finally comes to a conclusion. I started out wanting a Bigsby but I didn't want any holes
drilled. Found out pretty quick that that's not going to happen. The B3 did not work but the B7 did.
I'm not sure if I saved any drilling using the B7 vs. the B5 but anyhow.......here's how it looks.

[scotty]

Nice how does it play Craig? Me likey BTW nice grain on that 330