Whoa, Mike! That's a little strong and self-righteous, isn't it? Who is disparaging Mexican made products or Mexican workers? It is certainly not me. I was simply asking about your personal and collective experience with the Classic Players versus what I've read on other forums. Is it so wrong to question the quality of a new line of products? They certainly have the potential to be "as good as" or better than American products, but there are reasons they cost $700 less.Mike wrote:Hey you know all those Vintage 50s and 60s Strats, Telecasters, Jaguars and Jazzmasters everyone covets?
Do you know who they were made by?
Unskilled Mexican labour in a factory just across the border. That's right - pull your head out of your arse and you might learn something.
Ironically, I went to a local music store just last night to try a CP HH out for myself. Guess what? The neck pickup blender pot was not working properly. I notified one of the employees so their tech could take care of it or send it back to Fender. I also played regular CP Jag and a Jazzy. The JM seemed to be just fine, but the Jag had a loose bridge that wobbled any time the trem was used. Simple fix, but a detail that might have been addressed if it were an instrument of a higher price point. IMO, for that price they should have a "Corona" level of quality and care coming from the factory.
I detect some serious sensitivity to MIM Fender products here. While MIM products are generally fine products, it is foolish to believe that all Ensenada-made products and Corona-made products should be held to the same standard and quality. It has little to do with where it is made or who made it. It has everything to do with the components from which they are made, the systems that dictate how they are made, and the quality control throughout the process. Fender needs a reason to charge more for American-made products. Those reasons are better parts and improved attention to detail. MIM products are what they are. Cheaper versions of US-made products. Cost savings are built into the product and the process.
And the "coveted instruments from the 50s and 60s" argument is lame. They suffered terrible QC issues, too. More so than today. Any vintage collector will tell you not every Fender made in the so-called Golden Age of guitars is worthy of the adulation bestowed upon it because of its age. They made a lot of crap then, too. Machining and tolerances couldn't be maintained as tightly as today's equipment and technology. Even then, they were looking for cheap ways to make guitars. Their goal was to undercut Gibson's higher prices. Oh, and CBS-era Fender? Not exactly Fender's strongest effort, but it wasn't because of "unskilled" workers. Many of the same workers who built the hallowed classics churned out guitars with lower quality pots, smaller blocks, three-bold necks, SEVEN-piece bodies, etc. Along with every other industry in the 70's, Fender looked at the product and the system and figured out where they could cut costs.
So don't make this about the nationality, geography, or skill level of the people making these instruments. They've got production goals and manufacturing standards set for them by Fender. It is economies of scale. It is Fender applying a price to an acceptable level of quality as dictated by the free market. Feel free to remove your own head from your arse, refrain from assuming you're smarter than everyone, and educate yourself on the basics of business and economics.
Geez...
