Page 2 of 7
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:12 am
by bobcat
*GASP* Walnut wings AND skunk stripe!!! BEST THING EVER!!!
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:25 am
by rickfan60
It conjures up that 60's 4005 look.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:43 am
by bassduke49
Zactly! And then there will be the new color. What will it be? Hmm.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:59 am
by rickfan60
I like the way Dale shaped the wings on Dave's bass. They are more like the ones on the big headstock 4000 series. Perhaps I will try that with yours, Paul.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 2:11 pm
by bassduke49
Please do. I always thought the headstock looked kinda pudgy.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 3:28 pm
by aceonbass
Just my 2 cents worth, but I wouldn't use Grovers on a walnut headstock conversion. I don't think it would look right. Instead, I'd get a set of unstamped Schaller vintage style tuners which look more correct. And by the way, I don't understand why anyone would take the paint stripper approach to a bass or guitar. It mucks up the wood and plastic and besides, the hand sanding process gets me in touch with the instrument and the ZEN-like state that ensues is great to get the creative juices flowing on a project.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:56 pm
by rickfan60
I have at least one set of 70's vintage tuners here.
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 6:00 pm
by bassduke49
Thanks Dane, for your input, but the bass was fudged ("only I didn't say fudged") up by yours truly when I bought it used. I wanted to change the finish on it because it was chipped badly in the back. I knew I could apply a new finish because I knew how to airbrush. But I was young and foolish. I used ZipStrip on it, and that chewed into the position markers and binding, but before all was lost, I wiped it off and proceeded. This was in 1975. I know that pre-1973 basses are collectible and I know why, but there's no sense trying to make this one look like a brand new '72. It's way past that, so now I want to have it look unique with some of the features I really like. I kinda like the Grovers and the Toaster, but a few years ago I had installed a new high-gain in the bridge, replaced the old (split) tailpiece that had its chrome flaking off. So it's not going to be a like-new '72, and its not going to remain with all my sins on display. It's now going to be a like a hot rod made from a '32 Ford V8 chassis. So, it will have new binding, new frets, old tuners, one old and one new pickup, and a dazzling paint job, color yet to be determined. Kinda like what's his name does to those old 3000s. What's his name? Uh, Dale? No, Duane? No ...
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:09 am
by rickfan60
You will have to speak a little louder until I get my new ears!

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:31 am
by bassduke49
What?
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:35 am
by incubus2432
That looks perfect the way it is!

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:31 pm
by rikk
It hurts just looking at it. You should be posting things like that. At least you didn't post a picture of the blade going through. THAT would have been PAINFUL.
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:06 pm
by rickfan60
No blade, I carefully heated the glue in the lamination until it let go. The trick is to not heat the center laminations too much.
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:38 pm
by rikk
Ted, That makes me feel better. I think?
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:06 pm
by rickfan60
The walnut ears have been cut and are now ready for attachment. First the upper one.......
Then the lower....
The next step is to hand sand them so they blend into the maple and look like they had always been there.