Page 1 of 1
Scraping down a ric 4004 neck
Posted: Sat Mar 16, 2002 5:35 am
by humbucker75
I have found a luthier(@Ed Roman guitars) who
does Ric guitar conversions ie removing the large heel and scraping down(thinning) the neck-
Could this be done to a 4004/3 -would the neck weaken, due do the loss of wood and 2x truss rods?
any suggestions?
Posted: Sat Mar 16, 2002 7:23 am
by markthemd
Changing the heel is one of Ed's favorite things to do and he is passionate about heels and why do makers enlarge them or change them from original spec.
The heel is just a way to 'end' the neck taper .Each maker does it their way .
As tooling changes and operators of equipment change , so goes the heel.
Ed has plenty of PRS pphotos at his site and the ever changing heel of PRS guitars.An interesting study actually.
Does this NEED to be done? not really .
Does it weaken the neck ? ...Rickenbackers have over two inches of wood that is set into the body on the semi-hollow guitars , that is more than a Gibson ES-335, so no ...it would not harm the joint.Plus , the heel is not what is the re-inforcement of the neck .You do need a certain amount of material as the end of the fretboard area on a Rick is limited and there is a fulcrum point to it ...perhaps 'more' heel was thought to help with putting an end to the body curling effect .I don't know why it was done .It could also be that ,the shaper is now a different cutter and a new jig is being used .Also if it is now cut using a cup carver , and a key copier type mechanism , that would also change the process.
The heel on a neck through however , would not matter.
Case in point.........BC Rich guitars from the 1970's to the mid 1980's with neck through construction.I have NEVER seen one of these guitars have body curl and they have less heel than just about any guitar that I can think of .
They started the whole heeless thing .