'66 360/12 complete resto

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:01 am

Hey gang. I'd like to solicit suggestions for my next project. The title says it all. I'm torn between burgundyglo and amber fireglo. I'm also considering "relic-ing" it like Fender does with their stuff. Opinions please! Thanks, J

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:06 am

Burgundyglo, light amber coat over it. Then again, a period correct color might be better. There's not gonna be any patches in the body that need covering, right?

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:13 am

Sounds like a good project if you have the right guitar to start with. You'll probably get a few people worked up over the period aging of it. IMO: if it's yours, do what you want and enjoy it. I've always appreciated the look of a played/worn guitar, they show their history. These are guitars, you play them, they wear, put them in a museum and they'll look new forever.

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:40 am

Thanks guys.

Dale - I agree. If people want to hang them in a museum, that is all well and good, but it's cool to play 'em too. And I think a 60's Rick that is recently restored but looks like it's worn would be cool. I could play it without fear, and get reespeect from the other dogs.

JB - Good point on the period correctness. Didnt' they have BG in 66? Parks' timeline says so. No patches to cover. And I have the serial plate, so how cool is that?

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:41 am

I'm guessing it's already 'relic'd'.

Intentionally making a guitar look old and worn is anathema to me. But a total restoration of your '66 360 sounds great.

Burgundyglo is nice. But if you've got some nice figure in the wood, go with Fireglo / Amber-Fireglo.

Best of luck.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:45 am

Hmm, I can't remember having seen it that early, I thought it was '68 for them.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:14 am

BG wasn't around in '66...My 'purist' vote would be for Fireglo.

beatlefreak · Post by **beatlefreak** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:54 am

AFG would be cool. I wouldn't relic it, but that's just me. With your stage antics, it'll probably end up that way soon enough!

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:54 am

AFG, and instead of restoring it and then relicking it, just leave it alone. It's probably pre-relicked.

8mileshigh · Post by **8mileshigh** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:48 am

That's what I was just thinking? Any photos J Dog? Maybe just play the heck out of it as it is?

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:49 am

Well, the body is covered in an opaque burgundy color, even the cavity, so it has to be stripped anyway. The neck and headstock have no finish at all. I'm really hoping for some CB under there!

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:00 am

Thanks everybody! I'll post pics tonight. Thanks to the guy who sold it to me too, he can identify himself if he wishes. It's no state secret though.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:32 am

J Dog, if it's the toilet seat model 360 then it will have CB on the back only.

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:39 am

Yep, it's got the rounded edges on the top.

dswp · Post by **dswp** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:03 am

Even knowing the guitar the little that I do, a full restoration is needed.

JDog, I say that you have a real gem there. Do it up with a new factory correct finish. Given the work that must be done, I vote Jetglo.