ShortScale.org

Dear folks, Having been inspired by Mike's duo-sonic project, i was wondering how the bridge height issue (mustang bridge standing taller than the flat-plate duo bridge) could be rectified without the shimming Mike had to do. Was there a manufacturing difference between say a '65 duo-sonic II and a '65 mustang? Did Fender take some material off the neck heel or neck pocket of the duo to lower the fretboard a tad? Your expertise is welcomed.

...Don't quote me on this, but iirc Mike actually used either a Toronado or a Squier Musicmaster bridge, which fits in the same hole as a Duo bridge, but is constructed differently.

there's no difference on vintage models, i just checked. the duo and mustang bridge heights are essentially the same.

Jagermeister wrote:...Don't quote me on this, but iirc Mike actually used either a Toronado or a Squier Musicmaster bridge, which fits in the same hole as a Duo bridge, but is constructed differently.

This is the case. It was a toronado bridge as I used the same thing on the Bronco Jr project. I had to shim the neck.

So would the difference be in the bridge plate thickness or were the saddle height adjustment screws longer or? The reason i ask is that, iirc, Mike stated that he took material off the neck pocket of RobertOG's body AND had to do some pretty serious (2-cd's!!) shimming and i'm looking for a way around that-if possible. Thanks for the input so far!!!

i think you'd be ok as long as you weren't using a toronado bridge...(?) but then, i've never seen a toronado bridge up close so i can't comment on that with any great authority.

i used a squier musicmaster reissue bridge as a temporary stopgap (on a butchered vintage musicmaster) until i got a 60s bridge and there was no problem. the screw holes lined up perfectly and the height was the same when adjusted (without shimming obviously). only difference is reissue bridges have a string-through-body design and 6 individual saddles, as opposed to the strings going through the back of the plate and 3 saddles. so i'd imagine as long as the neck pocket was roughly the same depth as a fender body you'd be ok with either of those. i'm no expert though!

mike used a toronado bridge.
ok so, a standard neck pocket is 5/8ths deep from the top of the body.
i think that the normal stang neck sat about 16 mms at the center of the neck, rod may have to verify this for sure.
basically this means that the bridge can't really be raised(like it should) without modification of some sort(i.e. shimming the bridge or the neck/ routing deeper, and then trimming your neck screws accordingly)
keep in mind, both mike and mickie used warmoth necks, stang styled bodies, and the same bridge, and with both of them i routed the neck pockets the same.
the bronco jr. has really low action, and i think im going to raise it when i re-string it.
i think i remember measuring my friends 2005 mexi toro, but i don't know what i did with the measurements.

The neck pocket we took wood from and then replaced actually so the relationship between the neck and the pickups would be right. Those CD shims for the bridge worked a treat though, still rocking the DuoSonic.

Now i remember why i had tried to get certain companies to manufacture a run of original spec/'65 type duo bridges I think i'll just go the mustang trem route. Thanks for the input dudes.

Well Mustang trems are beautiful aesthetically, so it's not the end of the world.

In keeping with how my entire life goes i just scored a beater 60's/70's vintage style duo II bridge from ebay so it looks like i finally get to start my duo. Thanks to all of your input, i feel confident that the height issue of using a toronado bridge is now moot-WOOT!!! Now i think i'll get back to Bill Callaham about some compensated brass saddles. Thanks again folks!!!