[gtone]

IMHO, if it has a bolt-on neck, it's not a project worth doing. If it's a set neck and a good player, it may be worth it however. YMMV, given whatever sentimental value this guitar has for you...

 

[gtone]

A little late to the bolt on neck thing. I have to ask. Why is that a problem? Show of hands, how many of you have a set neck strat? Boy those crickets are loud!!! One of those comments that makes no sense. Just like a laminated acoustic guitar is a piece of crap. Never understood that one either. They use veneer to make a laminate. Veneer is the best of the best part of the wood. It's the tenderloin of wood. But it's crap to make a guitar that way.....I'm not talking about plywood, talking about proper laminates.

I think it is a cool guitar and if you have a few bucks to spend on it why not? Older wood seems to add some kind of mojo to the sound in my opinion

I made the original "bolt-on neck" comment on post #3 and I stand by it. There's nothing wrong with a bolt-on neck on a Fender, that's what Fender's good at after all, but Gibson copies mostly feature set necks. As a result of these two dichotomies, buyers of Fender copies today, current or old production, tend to put a premium on bolt-on neck models while buyers of Gibson copies tend to go for, you guessed it - set necks. That's why decent quality set-neck LP/SG/Jr/V/Explorer copies from Japan can fetch upward of $1K or more while copies of the same models with bolt-on necks often languish in the sub-$200 range (on a good day) or serve out some other purpose/fate. Ergo, my contention was made against the backdrop of basic supply/demand economics. (Sorry, can't help it - was a financial professional for 27 yrs).

Besides, my comment was prefaced by "IMHO", so don't hate on me for having one.

Last, but not least, my post clearly intimated to disregard the comment if he was considering the project for sentimental reasons, so everyone should just cool the firetruck down and maybe dial a little chill into the equation.