Page 4 of 8
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:05 pm
by larry_mondello
The body CAN be salvaged ... but you will definately need to wet out the top and heat it .
I do like Dale's idea of cutting off the top .... a Bridgeport mill would do it nicely .
Take off 1/4" ... but not before you make an MDF templete with a 1/4" bottom bearing bit .
This allows you to find the soundhole and duplicate the control cavity .
The pickup cavities can be drilled out with a Speedbore ..as they were in the Factory .
To make the new top... get a nice piece of clear maple or figured maple ... GILMAR wood products in Portland Ore. is a nice source ..pricey but nice .To be really 'tricky' glue it so the center seams all match .
You would spend less time and get a great body/guitar .
Talking thru my hat ! LOL !
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:57 pm
by dale_fortune
Hey Good to hear from you Larry. I get a lot of my wood from Gilmers Wood Company 2211 N.W. St. Helens Rd. Portland Ore. 97210 (503) 274-1271
in case anyone needs excetional wood, he has it all except KOA, which I buy direct from the Big Island. Now about that bird house, I'm thinking maybe a wall clock or put a sweet potatoe in it and make a planter. Just joking ya know. When finished I'm sure it will be a nice guitar.
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 11:07 pm
by jingle_jangle
What do you think, Mr. Coyle? Should we replace the top or soldier on with the original one? I do have a Bridgeport mill that I use in place of an overarm router. Replacing the top is a pretty straightforward task...
6 of one, half a dozen of the other to me. However, it would give you the opportunity of having a top with some flame.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:19 am
by harvey49
A Rick top with quilting like I've seen on some Les Paul Gibsons and finished in MB or AG what an awesome site. But what about the originality issue? What a situation to be in David, but seeing Paul has the gear to do the job it must be a tempting proposition.
I'm sure we all eagerly await the outcome!
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:48 am
by bill_yantz
Paul, I have been a cheerleader in the background enjoying every post and pic of this project. Great work from another Virginia Beach guy. You are truly significant contributor Ricresource.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 6:06 am
by patrickkelly
As an amateur refinisher, I am thoroughly enjoying this thread.
IMO, do NOT replace the top. Far preferable to use the original. Maybe make a mold of this one in case you ever need it for a later project.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:53 pm
by jingle_jangle
I DO have an opinion on this, original vs. replace and go flamey, but I'm going to wait awhile and see what others--and especially David C.--have to say.
Patrick, I think you mean "pattern", right--trace around it, etc.? I can't really see a need for that, because if I replace the top on any other 330, I'll make it to fit that guitar, and I don't plan on scratchbuilding any 330s anytime soon!
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 6:28 pm
by xcoyle
Original top. This whole project is about bringing back to life what was dead, flaws and all. If we replaced the top it would feel like a reissue, which is great but missing something. I know it will not have vintage value to collectors with a refin, but it will have that "I been around the block" vibe.
With regard to making a mold, I sent this guitar to Paul in a new Ric SKB case, and it fits like a glove. I don't think the 330 shape has changed at all since the mid 60's.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 6:33 pm
by xcoyle
And your bird can sing!
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 12:03 am
by jingle_jangle
There you go. And this is also my take on the old vs. new top issue. "Bringing the dead back to life" puts it perfectly. And let's hope that the flaws are minimal!
If David had sent me the 330 with the top missing or half gone (a la Townshend wall decoration), it would be another issue entirely. Then we'd be making a new top, pronto.
I'm surprised that nobody brought up the issue of the seam that would result across the tapered tailpiece relief on the front of the guitar, if a new top were grafted on. (Because the hollowbody Ricks are billet-routed from the back originally, it's the back, not the front, that is a separate piece.) This seam would show as a grain interruption in this area, and would be a dead tipoff to non-originality.
On a translucent-finished guitar (this one will be Autumnglo), this seam would be in the glo-transitional zone (to coin a mouthful) and would be a real distraction, I believe.
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:26 am
by jwilli
Have you decided on which Autumnglo? 58? 59? I know its not the mid 60s one (red to to almost black).
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:47 am
by tony_carey
There was a red to black 1997 on ebay UK not long ago John....a lovely colour, it really grew on me. What was this colour known as? I've never seen one before, apart from on p31 of the Ric book.
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:57 am
by jwilli
59
67
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:59 am
by jwilli
Oops, forgot the '58.
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:24 am
by jingle_jangle
It's impossible to talk about color in specifics, as you guys know. And posting pictures is great for talking about relative stuff, but due to color shift in the digital realm, as well as differences in monitor color temperatures, we can't actually match colors from a sample that we see on screen.
For that reason, David and I have agreed on a picture of an Autumnglo Rick that I'm going to use as reference. I'll then spray up some samples on light maple that he can see in the flesh (so to speak) and we'll match the guitar's finish to whatever he agrees looks best.
In general terms, the picture which we've agreed upon is close to the '58 and '59, but with a bit less yellow in the center area of the burst. The goal is a mellow, not sparkling "new", look.
The '58 above has its control opening done with either a hole saw or a Forstner bit. By '68, Rick had progressed to a handheld electric jigsaw, which is how David's was cut. You can still see the teethmarks from the blade on his!