Neck angled backwards

billikenn · Post by **billikenn** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:18 am

I have a dakota and the neck when all tension is removed from it is angled backwards. Partly at the 12th fret and again around the 5th fret.
When I string it with 12s its comes just barly straight. In ither words I cant use any guage lighter then 12s or I get strings tat buzz, because the neck is angled backwards.
keep in mind both truss rods are completely disengaged - ie the nuts are loose on the ends.

Is there any way I can season the wood so that it relaxes a bit so I can use 11s or even 10s?

Say if I were to start a regimin of increasing the humidity and decreasing it on a regular basis with 12s tuned 2 or 3 half steps high, would that "breakin" the neck some? with out "breaking" the neck mind you...

JP

glennlewis · Post by **glennlewis** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:34 am

Josh, I may not be understanding your predicament correctly, but I think the problem is that you have no tension on the truss rods, hence the neck is slanted away from the "top" of the guitar. Add truss rod tension and the neck will start to bow towards the top. By using 12's, you are making the strings supply all of the tension - to do what the truss rods should be helping to achieve.

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:14 pm

What I think he's saying is that the neck should not be angled backwards on an unstringed instrument if the truss rods are completely disengaged. I agree.

Unlikely, but could the metal channel be stuck in the wood channel or between the fingerboard and neck wood thereby causing a truss rod-like effect?

What is happening to your Dakota is not normal.

316mark · Post by **316mark** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:17 pm

You're screwed. The only real way to correct a backbow is to plane the neck straight. You could try putting a block of something between the pickups to lift the strings an inch off the fretboard, tune the strings sharp and let it sit for a week. The high strings will change the angle of force on the neck, putting more force on correcting the backbow rather than trying to compress the neck. Who knows if it'll last though.

billikenn · Post by **billikenn** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:53 pm

Glenn,
Im not sure if your confused as to my predicament, or if you are confused as to the mechanism of truss rods.

the rods counter act the strings, in other words they create more back bow because the strings pull the neck forward.

John,
doesnt seem likely beacuse the rods act normally otehrwise, and string tension does correct the bow. If it were a mechanical binding like that I would assume the string would either "pop" it free or have no effect.

Mark,
Ive already decided to start my regimine of humidity extreems. Right now the guitar is pretty much sittin in a sauna. and once a day I wipe teh neck with a damp cloth. right now it stays stright when I take the string tension off (12s tuned to adgbea) Oh yeah I supported the head stock and put a weight on the neck during the day today. next Im gunna let it dry out again slowly in the right position and then put it back in th ehumidity and then dry it with heat in teh right position.
I figure if nothing else the heat will do the trick, not a lot of heat - probably a heating pad...

well if nothing else I know the humidity helps - I could feasibly leave a humidifier in the room sfor the next 5 years as the neck sets - but it is probably cheaper to buy a new one..

wish me luck - I need it

JP

billikenn · Post by **billikenn** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:57 pm

oh yeah if all else fails - and I mean everything Im gunna epoxy saturate the neck.
If you use low vicosity epoxy with 10% graphite the neck will saok it up. It can be sanded and the graphite acts as a lube... and epoxy is strong stuff so it should hold the neck stright...

except my maple neck will be black/charcoal = that sucks
JP

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 3:47 pm

Josh,

No savior here, just curiosity: how old is your Dakota?

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 3:48 pm

Also, how low is your bridge?

philipnz · Post by **philipnz** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 6:11 pm

I asked about how Josh was getting along a few days ago in a post. This was a new Dakota few months ago that he had bought through Ed Roman. It had the heel removed and necked shaved as Ed Roman advertises on his site. Obviously something has gone wrong. I'd say its stuffed. Possibly a good warning to others that may want to alter their Rickenbackers in a way not engineered by the company.

philipnz · Post by **philipnz** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 6:27 pm

p.s.
refer previous posting here
../7/4175.html"../43/4432.html" TARGET="_top">../43/4432.html"MB">

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 4:44 am

Thanks Philip.

You'd think that wood removed from the neck would cause the opposite problem; needing more truss rod tension!

At the very least, you should probably check out a guitar as it came from the factory before modding it!

Good luck, Josh. Seriously.

316mark · Post by **316mark** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 4:46 am

If I had a guitar that was modified by the dealer, thus killing the factory warranty, I would think the dealer would replace it for you. Did you try talking to them about this? It's obviously not an abuse issue, and RIC would certainly replace it for you if it were stock.
Give Ed Roman a call and see what he says.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 5:10 am

Mortivan: I am not sure about the physics of the adjustment made, however, I am thinking that the removal of the heel had a significant role to play. Wouldn't this removal cause there to be less force pushing the neck upward. Just my two cents. I was never in the top five in advanced Physics.

The only fix as I see it, being interested in armchair luthiery, is to remove the neck from the body and then readjust the angle at which the neck meets the body. The cost effectiveness of this is certainly questionable. Approaching the dealer would seem to be the way to go here.

Finally, why was this modification necessary to begin with?

billikenn · Post by **billikenn** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 6:22 am

Phillip,
yep thats my baby

John,
the only things I was worried about with th emod was that
1 - the neck wouldnt support the strings
2 - removing the heel would change the support for the lower bout of the truss rods makin them inoperable or having a reverse effect of what they were intended (but they work, and as intended)

I agree iwth the quality control before modding. I never saw the guitar befor eit was done. And I think they didnt check it out throughly. there is a very small knot/extreeme figure right where the main problem lies on the back of the neck
anybody that knows anything knows warping is much more prone around "twisted wood". the area I am talkin about is very slight but it is there.

yeah Ive been searching for fixes to back bow and go figure one I found is to thin the neck... doh

Peter,
the heel itsself does not exert force. It can transfer a load, but essentially it is the same piece of wood. In otherwords removing may weaken the structure but it will not result i more force one way or another without any outside forces...

resettin the angle would not be worth it on the dakota, since the neckthrough.

as for the necessity of the mod, well Im one oof those faith ric buyers. The only Ric within 4 hours was a very old over priced 12 string with the skinny neck at a guitar center. That and with everything I have read before buying about how thick the neck is forcd me to talk myself into the mod. considering I was coming off a shredder type neck on a Jackson.
I look back now and say it wasnt worth it, but on the other hand the neck is very comfortable.

GOOD NEWS,
after drying overnight, with a light weight the neck has more front bow then it did completely hydrated. so far things are looking good.

Keep Praying for me and my ric...

JP

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 7:31 am

Pete,

That does make a lot of sense.

I was thinking more of the neck shaving than the heel removal. The heel is quite a substantial chunk, isn't it?!