Jagstang Neck same as Mustang?
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:27 am
I know they are the same scale. Is the neck pocket "absolutely dead on 100% the same" or "ehh, it's close enough"?
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:34 am
I'm 99.999% sure that they are the the exact same neck with a different decal. But I've never tried switching the necks around, so I'm not 100%.
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:03 am
depends on what mustang neck you are talking about.
they are the same exact as the reissue mustang made from 94-99 (brown tort pickguards). they came in olympic white with RED tort pickguards and sonic blue with RED tort pickguards. not to beconfused with the 69RI's from 2002-2005. those necks will work fine but they aren't the same exact thing. same as the necks from the 2000-2002 compstang RI's
still not the same as the current RI 65 mustang. this guitar has a chunkier profile than earlier reissues from japan. they have been progressively been getting chunkier
so it goes like this
1. jagstang 94-99 = mustang 94-99 thinest profile
2. compstang 00-02 = 69RI 02-05 medium profile
3. 65RI 06-09 = largest profile.
to a person that doesn't own all three of these guitars i doubt you would even notice though. im sure all the butts will fit just fine in all models though.
they are the same exact as the reissue mustang made from 94-99 (brown tort pickguards). they came in olympic white with RED tort pickguards and sonic blue with RED tort pickguards. not to beconfused with the 69RI's from 2002-2005. those necks will work fine but they aren't the same exact thing. same as the necks from the 2000-2002 compstang RI's
still not the same as the current RI 65 mustang. this guitar has a chunkier profile than earlier reissues from japan. they have been progressively been getting chunkier
so it goes like this
1. jagstang 94-99 = mustang 94-99 thinest profile
2. compstang 00-02 = 69RI 02-05 medium profile
3. 65RI 06-09 = largest profile.
to a person that doesn't own all three of these guitars i doubt you would even notice though. im sure all the butts will fit just fine in all models though.
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:21 am
I've got a 66 Mustang body template w/out the neck pocket. I never copied the neck pocket route cause the Mustang had been extensively modified before it got to me. So yeh, that's good news, I'll just copy my Jagstang neck pocket on to the Mustang body template.
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:18 am
like rob said, they are the same except the profile,
i once copied the profile from a 96 jag-stang, 96 jaguar, and an 04 compstang to show the difference.
i once copied the profile from a 96 jag-stang, 96 jaguar, and an 04 compstang to show the difference.
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:33 am
Forgive my ignorance; but what does "profile" mean in relation to guitar necks? Radius or something different?
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:56 am
first google result wrote:Profiles: A "C," "U," or "V?"
Neck profile (the "shape" of the neck) is probably the most personal element of a guitar. It affects how your hand and fingers "fit" the neck and how easily you can move from fret to fret. From early on acoustic guitars employed some variation of a "C" shape. Electric guitar makers have experimented extensively and a variety of profiles have evolved with the preferences of players. Jeff Beck's favorite Fender Stratocasters had a very fat "C" shape; current models of Fender's Custom Artist Jeff Beck Signature Strat have a smaller "C" to be more player-friendly.
Similar to the "C" is the oval neck profile. This offers a less pronounced curve at the back and has its followers. On the other side is the "U" - an almost-rectangular shape that appeared on many Fenders - perhaps best for players with long fingers. And Eric Clapton has favored a "V" neck that provides a comfortable groove down the middle. A variation on this is the "inverted V," that is thicker on the bass side and thinner on the treble side.
Width is as much a factor in the neck profile as shape, leading some guitar makers to abandon the letter analogy and begin describing profiles as "wide-fat" or "regular-thin" and so on, in which widths are "wide, regular or narrow" and depths range from "fat to regular to thin." This often provides a clearer description of the profile and can help you when you're shopping for guitars online. Parker and Paul Reed Smith use these types of descriptions.
So there are the "big three" elements of guitar necks. Sound like a lot? Once you start comparing guitars it'll all make sense! There's more to consider - fingerboards, fret sizes, headstock angles - but those can wait for another Buying Guide!
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:04 am
Meh. I'd say a thread talking about the difference in neck profiles and the differences between the necks in general is a pretty valid place to ask about profiles.Haze wrote:first google result wrote:
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:24 am
Oh ok. I always just called it neck 'shape'.
@robert(original) what was the difference between the 96 jstang and 96 jag profiles?
@James @haze thanks fellas
@robert(original) what was the difference between the 96 jstang and 96 jag profiles?
@James @haze thanks fellas
Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:15 am
I love how Robroe has a terrifying knowledge of Mustang and Jag-stang necks.
I'm confident I could ask him about my Jag-stang neck and he'd be able to tell me that it's sitting too close to the radiator and the piece of wood it's made from misses it's mother.
I'm confident I could ask him about my Jag-stang neck and he'd be able to tell me that it's sitting too close to the radiator and the piece of wood it's made from misses it's mother.
Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:06 am
In my experience, Mustang/jag-stang neck is more rounded, Jaguar's is flatter in the middle which makes it feel wider as you wrap your hand around it.prospect wrote:what was the difference between the 96 jstang and 96 jag profiles?
A little known tidbit about those two guitars is that pre-CBS/CIJ Jaguars and Mustangs/JS's actually have slightly different headstocks, nevermind other specs on the neck. The Jag's is wider and taller, similar shape to stang but scaled up and with more wood before the low E tuning peg. This doesn't apply to CBS era Jags though, as they had Stratocaster headstocks... and certain AV Jags I've seen have odd differences.
Also, at least with my CIJ Jag vs. JS, the headstock of the Jag is set at a shallower angle with regards to the nut, which probably contributes to the less-snappy feel of the Jag.
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 1:57 am
Rob, this post was extremely useful to me.robroe wrote:depends on what mustang neck you are talking about.
they are the same exact as the reissue mustang made from 94-99 (brown tort pickguards). they came in olympic white with RED tort pickguards and sonic blue with RED tort pickguards. not to beconfused with the 69RI's from 2002-2005. those necks will work fine but they aren't the same exact thing. same as the necks from the 2000-2002 compstang RI's
still not the same as the current RI 65 mustang. this guitar has a chunkier profile than earlier reissues from japan. they have been progressively been getting chunkier
so it goes like this
1. jagstang 94-99 = mustang 94-99 thinest profile
2. compstang 00-02 = 69RI 02-05 medium profile
3. 65RI 06-09 = largest profile.
to a person that doesn't own all three of these guitars i doubt you would even notice though. im sure all the butts will fit just fine in all models though.
And from what I've been able to tell, DEAD ON accurate.I picked up a '94 MIJ Mustang RI neck, and it is pure butter in my hands. I absolutely LOVE IT!
I also have the original '75 Musicmaster neck, and an original '65 Mustang neck. I still have not played the '65 RI, so I can't comment on that, but I DEFINITELY love the mid 90s era MIJ Mustang necks!
Re: Jagstang Neck same as Mustang?
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 4:02 am
Its a crap shoot your just going to have to try it,,The big question is do the mounting holes line up..Joey wrote:I know they are the same scale. Is the neck pocket "absolutely dead on 100% the same" or "ehh, it's close enough"?
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 6:04 am
BacchusPaul wrote:I love how Robroe has a terrifying knowledge of Mustang and Jag-stang necks.
I'm confident I could ask him about my Jag-stang neck and he'd be able to tell me that it's sitting too close to the radiator and the piece of wood it's made from misses it's mother.
hahaha
Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 10:22 pm
I sometimes wonder if this RI business i a load of nonsense, or just how accurate is it meant to be? How can a particular RI neck progressively get 'chunkier'.
Incidently, i fitted a 66 Mustang neck on a Jag-Stang and it is smaller in width than the body pocket.
Incidently, i fitted a 66 Mustang neck on a Jag-Stang and it is smaller in width than the body pocket.
Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 9:19 am
They're not a particular RI neck, as Rob says they're different models.Fran wrote:How can a particular RI neck progressively get 'chunkier'
'65 Mustangs obviously had thicker neck profiles than the later Compstangs.
Posted: Tue May 25, 2010 8:23 pm
I know there are two models of reissue, i read Robs post as saying one specific model (ie.65) got progressively chunkier depending on the period the RI was made. Perhaps i read it wrong.Mike wrote:They're not a particular RI neck, as Rob says they're different models.Fran wrote:How can a particular RI neck progressively get 'chunkier'
'65 Mustangs obviously had thicker neck profiles than the later Compstangs.
Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 12:30 am
affirmative