what is it about the jag-stang neck

esteban · Post by **esteban** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:50 am

that makes it so comfortable? i hear a lot of "my jag-stang has the most comfortable neck." i know kurt supposedly combined a lot of aspects from his favorite necks, but what were they? what kind of profile does it have, etc?

BobArsecake · Post by **BobArsecake** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:26 am

I'm pretty sure it's just a Mustang neck, and yeah, I find it ridiculously comfortable, it's just a shame how the guitar sounds.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:33 am

blane · Post by **blane** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:51 am

According to the story, he didn't "combine a lot of aspects from his favorite necks" he sent them his favorite mustang neck and had them copy it.

I never found it to be any more comfortable then my mustang neck however.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:52 am

It's fairly obvious that even if Kurt's Jag-Stangs had a neck copied from his Mustang, that the production Jag-Stang necks were clearly just the same neck from the MIJ Mustangs being built at the time. Given all the other cost saving cuts on that guitar, I seriously doubt it has a custom neck.

downer · Post by **downer** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:59 pm

not again....
well, i still think the neck is a bit thinner than mustangs, that what makes it even more comfortable...
mike, would it really be so expensive, to set a bit different values (-2mm) on their cutting machines to make this neck thinner?
or take the mustang necks and a bit change them?
if i take your teory, i would have to think, that all the mustangs necks are the same, which they are obviously NOT. just take the 69 reissue and the 65 reissue, they are different, feel it! the 65 is really thick, like a vintage 65 mustang, and the 69 is thinner, like vintage competition series and the 70s mustangs. they made a different neck. i have a friend who now has all the mustangs i talk about, he has 4 actualy and he also says 65 is different than 69. another friend who has vintage mustangs also admits it.
jag-stang is pretty close to those 69 mustangs, but even thinner.
believe me, i already played AV 65 mustang, AV 71mustang, 3 jagstangs and two 69 reissue mustangs + one 65 reissue mustang. this certainly doesnt make me a good player (i suck, i just have a passion for shortscales, thats why i played so many) but i guess it makes me a bit experienced in the necks theory.
you have your theory, but you once admited, you havent played a jag-stang and only had one mustang i think, so dont be so stubborn.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:11 pm

downer wrote:you have your theory, but you once admited, you havent played a jag-stang and only had one mustang i think, so dont be so stubborn.

Completely wrong. I owned a Jag-Stang for approximately 6 years.
I have played many Mustangs.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:11 pm

downer wrote:mike, would it really be so expensive, to set a bit different values (-2mm) on their cutting machines to make this neck thinner?

Why would they bother?

fullerplast · Post by **fullerplast** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:33 pm

I agree with Mike.

It's just speculation on my part, but at the time of the original Jag-Stang there were no '65 Mustang reissues. But Fender Japan had been offering the Mustang in various configurations for some time by then for the Japan market (and off and on in the U.S). My guess is that its just an off-the-shelf 24" neck, either Mustang or possibly even MIJ Jaguar (ala the Vista Jagmaster). Shit, they're all pretty comfy and tend to vary...

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:48 pm

It's not a Jaguar neck, we have people here who've had both and said that the area around the back of the headstock is different.

fullerplast · Post by **fullerplast** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:51 pm

ah... ok.

but regardless I too doubt they would tool up another neck or change the configuration of the CNC.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:52 pm

Indeed.

Like I said above, it's a terribly manufactured guitar all over. It's a parts guitar.

BobArsecake · Post by **BobArsecake** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:23 pm

Mike wrote:It's not a Jaguar neck, we have people here who've had both and said that the area around the back of the headstock is different.

+1 The Jag neck is a bit thicker.

esteban · Post by **esteban** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:11 pm

iono the story i read somewhere online went something like, some custom shop guy came over to kurt's house and looked at his most favorite necks, and they combined the best aspects of each.

i guess no one will ever know...

downer · Post by **downer** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:22 pm

BobArsecake wrote:
Mike wrote:It's not a Jaguar neck, we have people here who've had both and said that the area around the back of the headstock is different.
+1 The Jag neck is a bit thicker.

so is the 65 reissue

aphasiac · Post by **aphasiac** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:25 pm

man this topic AGAIN?

we just dont know if the JS neck is a custom one or not. most mustang owners say it is (i.e. it feels nothing like their reissues neck).

if it is from a stock mustang i'd like to know which one, as i want to buy one.

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:51 pm

Firstly, i agree it is one of the most comfy necks around nevermind just Fender necks.
Secondly, imo, between a 65 Mustang neck, 64 Jag neck and a CIJ Jag neck i'd say its closest to the 65 Mustang neck but not as 'clubby', it has less girth.
You would not imagine Fender Japan resetting tooling machines if they had already built up a stock of unused Mustang necks but then again the body is completely different so why would'nt they go to the trouble on the neck?
Its all speculation. I vote someone emails Fender Japan for the lowdown.

aphasiac · Post by **aphasiac** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:54 pm

Fran wrote:but then again the body is completely different so why would'nt they go to the trouble on the neck?

Indeed - apart from the CIJ Jaguar > Vista Jagmaster, are there other cases where Fender have re-used necks between different guitars? If Squires get uniquely designed neck, i dont see why a premium guitar wouldn't.

Fran wrote: Its all speculation. I vote someone emails Fender Japan for the lowdown.

Didn't someone here or on JS.com contact Fender r.e. the origin of the Jag-Stang pickups, and someone knowledgable replied?

Couldn't we do the same with the neck, and settle this annoying debate once and for all.

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:59 pm

aphasiac wrote:
Fran wrote: Its all speculation. I vote someone emails Fender Japan for the lowdown.
Didn't someone here or on JS.com contact Fender r.e. the origin of the Jag-Stang pickups, and someone knowledgable replied?

Couldn't we do the same with the neck, and settle this annoying debate once and for all.

I vaguely remember that at JS, did'nt someone say they were 'Atomics' beforehand?

Anyway, i think its a good idea. Although i do enjoy the never ending JS debates

*Edit* Vista JM's used Jag bodys as well.

aphasiac · Post by **aphasiac** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:07 pm

Fran wrote: I vaguely remember that at JS, did'nt someone say they were 'Atomics' beforehand?

I *think* the debate was over the humbucker and whether it was a faithful re-reaction of kurts or just a crappy one from a previous Fender HSS strat. Someone from Fender replied and said they remembered it was a custom jobbie. Or something like that.