ShortScale.org

Okay rather than state exactly what I'm up to I'm interested to see if anyone can come up with any genius design answers to a specific set of requirements. I've got my own idea at present but I'm thinking someone might come up with something more elegant....Here's the specs.

1. You have a Dano style body. Has a central wooden core of about 4" 3" (duh) wide on which to mount things ONLY - usual masonite top and bottom. No further wood working allowed to change that.

2. You want a tremelo. Enough up and down play for decent usage - no more than Jag trem type play though.

3. You want a roller bridge.


Mediating factors: Traditional roller TOM is OUT because the mounting legs are too wide for the 4" central core - no wood to mount the thimbles in. Tele bridge would mount but do not want tele saddles - must be roller. Likewise the trem must be able to be fully secured on a base of no more than 4 inches wide.

WHAT DO YOU DO AN DO?

Bigsby and a JM bridge, a la bigsby tele?

benecol wrote:Bigsby and a JM bridge, a la bigsby tele?

I am pretty sure a bigsby and JM bridge has screw holes/thimbles that are outside of the 4 inch limitiation. Essentially if the hardware has any mounting paraphenalia wider than the four holes on a tele bridge then it's out of the game.

JM bridge thimbles are much closer together than that, and you can get Bigsbys for full hollow guitars that don't surface mount at all.

n00b.

Yeah I was going to say about the non surface mount Bigsby things. This one from GFS would look good on a junky guitar.

http://www.guitarfetish.com/Xtrem-Float ... _4414.html#

Chrome overload with this bridge as well...

http://www.guitarfetish.com/Xaviere-Tel ... _4418.html

benecol wrote:JM bridge thimbles are much closer together than that, and you can get Bigsbys for full hollow guitars that don't surface mount at all.

n00b.

Haha I hear you on the non-surface mount - that's a possibility. But I can confirm that there is not enough wood width to fully mount thimbles for JM or TOM thimbles.

Dave wrote:

benecol wrote:JM bridge thimbles are much closer together than that, and you can get Bigsbys for full hollow guitars that don't surface mount at all.

n00b.

Haha I hear you on the non-surface mount - that's a possibility. But I can confirm that there is not enough wood width to fully mount thimbles for JM or TOM thimbles.

Check my second link Dave. Will mount like a Tele, roller bridge etc etc

George wrote:Chrome overload with this bridge as well...

http://www.guitarfetish.com/Xaviere-Tel ... _4418.html

This is actually my current option. Essentially it allows me to mount the thing and have a tom roller because the bridge poles are attached to the tele plate, allowing for mounting by the not-as-wide screw holes. The only downside Is I do not want the pup mounting bit so would have to cut it down. If there is a more elegant way to get this wilkinson style roller bridge mounted within the limitaions I'm all ears.

As for trem I may well go for that non-surface mount kind though it is a bit spendy....I'm looking at the vintage style one GFS do.

I was going to suggest a KAHLER but it may be wider than the 4" centre block. However, they are surface mounted and only require a small route like the Jaguar trem. All-in-one system as well.

DOH - the wood is 3" wide not 4 - hence my seemingly barking assertion that TOMS and bigsys won't fit...

WATTAKNOB

So any advances or better ideas than:




and this?