• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

LP models with ABR-1 Bridge?

1all's Pub

New member
Joined
Aug 15, 2015
Messages
157
It's was about 0.830" at the first fret and 1" at the 12th fret.
Yeah, that's definitely more of a 50s profile than a 60s.

And, in fact, is right in the wheelhouse of what I prefer, as well. :) My two 2016 Trads are both spec'd by Gibson as 50s necks and measure 0.840"/0.982" and 0.830"/0.976" respectively.

That said, 59 RIs tend to be even fatter... usually around the 0.900"/1.000" range... so they may still feel a bit fat (or you may love how they feel). R9s these days tend to oversimplify what real 59 necks were like. In fact, there was a lot of variance. In the back of the book Beauty of the Burst there's a chart that lists the neck sizes of some 30+ different legit vintage 59 LPs. They range from 0.807" to 0.921" at the 1st fret and from 0.945" to 1.000" at the 11th fret (for some reason the author measured the 11th instead of the usual 12th, go figure). If you calculate the average interval between the 1st & 11th frets you can arrive at a relatively fact-based 12th fret estimate (which I have done) which ranges from 0.952" to 1.011" for the 12th.


The averages then across the 30+ 59 LPs are: 0.879" (1st), 0.970" (11th), and 0.979" (calc'd 12th).

A lot of math, I know. Sorry. :). But it does go to show that what is thought of today as a 59 neck is actually pretty variable. All of which to say that yes, your 2003 (and my two 2016s) are solidly within the 59 neck frame of reference. :)
 

telstarstuff

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
109
Yeah, that's definitely more of a 50s profile than a 60s.

And, in fact, is right in the wheelhouse of what I prefer, as well. :) My two 2016 Trads are both spec'd by Gibson as 50s necks and measure 0.840"/0.982" and 0.830"/0.976" respectively.

That said, 59 RIs tend to be even fatter... usually around the 0.900"/1.000" range... so they may still feel a bit fat (or you may love how they feel). R9s these days tend to oversimplify what real 59 necks were like. In fact, there was a lot of variance. In the back of the book Beauty of the Burst there's a chart that lists the neck sizes of some 30+ different legit vintage 59 LPs. They range from 0.807" to 0.921" at the 1st fret and from 0.945" to 1.000" at the 11th fret (for some reason the author measured the 11th instead of the usual 12th, go figure). If you calculate the average interval between the 1st & 11th frets you can arrive at a relatively fact-based 12th fret estimate (which I have done) which ranges from 0.952" to 1.011" for the 12th.


The averages then across the 30+ 59 LPs are: 0.879" (1st), 0.970" (11th), and 0.979" (calc'd 12th).

A lot of math, I know. Sorry. :). But it does go to show that what is thought of today as a 59 neck is actually pretty variable. All of which to say that yes, your 2003 (and my two 2016s) are solidly within the 59 neck frame of reference. :)


You boys got me curious on my guitars. If you need further measurements on other years:

2004 Standard PPlus .84 to .97
1955 Les Paul Jr .93 to 1.02
1969 Les Paul Deluxe .84 to 1.02
:salude
 

drkato

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6
Just so everyone is in the know, while the bridges are indeed ABR-1s on the 2017s, there's two things to be aware of:

  • They don't sit on ABR-1 posts and/or inserts... they use the Nashville inserts and Nashville conversion posts (like you can buy from Philadelphia Luthier & other luthier suppliers)
  • They are the wired version of the ABR-1 (ie, which is historically incorrect, if that's important to you... and can tend to be rattle-prone if history is any judge)

Understand, I'm not bagging on them for these two things (I put a Nashville conversion ABR-1 on both of my 2016 Trads, so I have no problem with them--though I did go the non-wired route for the reasons mentioned above). But if someone is looking to buy a 2017 specifically because they think they are getting a true "old school" ABR-1 bridge on them like back in the day... they're not.

Wish I would have read this post earlier this month! :)

Your point about how the ABR is on Nashville conversion posts is spot on accurate. I found out the hard way, as I am building out a 2017 classic from stratosphere parts, and when I went to assemble, I immediately realized there was an issue with the bridge. I wasn’t sure what it was, as I had not ever run into this before. I found on eBay what I believe are the parts to remedy the problem. I ordered Gibson part no. BP-0390-002 (Gold for my needs). I will let you know when I get them this week if those are in fact the right ones.
 

drkato

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6
Wish I would have read this post earlier this month! :)

Your point about how the ABR is on Nashville conversion posts is spot on accurate. I found out the hard way, as I am building out a 2017 classic from stratosphere parts, and when I went to assemble, I immediately realized there was an issue with the bridge. I wasn’t sure what it was, as I had not ever run into this before. I found on eBay what I believe are the parts to remedy the problem. I ordered Gibson part no. BP-0390-002 (Gold for my needs). I will let you know when I get them this week if those are in fact the right ones.

Follow up…no, they aren’t the right ones. The ABR-1 holes are too small for these posts. At least the off the shelf ABR-1 I got that is intended for the long thin threaded posts. The Classic has a modified ABR-1 bridge with larger holes, or it uses a different conversion post. Still investigating.
 
Top