Price Check 2000 era 1959 R9

1958jr · Apr 21, 2018

I have seen large variances in asking prices for R9s (in excellent condition) in the 1999-2001 time frame. What is a fair price ?

Big Al · Apr 21, 2018

There are many fators affecting price. 99-00 was unique 40th Ann series. Aged Murphy's to unaged production models. Cases, case candy, condition, color, originality and amount of top figure all effect price.

This forum isn't a price guide resource. If you are aware of the qualities of 99-00 R9's and seeking one price is what you are willing to pay.

marshall1987 · Apr 28, 2018

Depends....Gibson made both R9 plain tops and R9 figured tops in 2000. The degree of figure will affect the price as well as condition and originality.

sws1 · Apr 29, 2018

In the past year, I sold a 2000 R9, gloss finish, lemon burst, all case candy but no COA, replaced pots and caps, some buckle rash for around $3500. Sold in a week or two, not like the people who ask $5k and have it sit forever.

Big Al · Apr 30, 2018

That is a Western Big Leaf Maple top and though stunning looking, many buyers value them less than figured Eastern Hard Maple. The Western Maple flame top is almost always quartersawn with strong medulary grain giving the very strong crosshatch look referred to as BBQ, Grill or Pajama Top. Western Maple takes color differently as it is darker more tan colored than the brighter more reflective Eastern Hard Maple.

This can effect price or desirability among those who desire more vintage correct Burst look, but I also know some who prefer the uniform look and intensity of good Western tops, like most every PRS 10 top, but from what I've seen good Eastern tops have better resale.

I have one of the first Lemonburst R9's a 2000 # 9 0503 with a rift sawn flitch match Rock Maple top that is so different from this one. I'll try to edit a photo in later. Yours is prettier, I think, but you can see how different the wood appears and the color thing.

Things like weight, 5 vs 6 digit ser.#, fingerboard color or ambered top coat etc... can all effect price. 2000 had no COA so that shouldn't matter. It's a flippin' minefield of shifting desirability.

I would have asked more than 3500 for yours, not 5 but 4200 maybe, but I am very partial to 1999-2000 R9's.

marshall1987 · Apr 30, 2018

My 2000 R9 plain top came with Dunlop 6105 frets (tall/narrow). I didn't much care for the frets, so a $300 refret was in the cards. New bone nut was $75. I also had the rounded fingerboard inlays replaced with period correct inlays w/ sharp corners.

18 years down the road this is one of my favorite Les Pauls. Love the big round neck profile. It fits my hand like a glove.

latestarter · Apr 30, 2018

I paid 3700 for my '99 R9 a few years back....I don't think the market has changed much.

Big Al · Apr 30, 2018

marshall1987 said:
My 2000 R9 plain top came with Dunlop 6105 frets (tall/narrow). I didn't much care for the frets, so a $300 refret was in the cards. New bone nut was $75. I also had the rounded fingerboard inlays replaced with period correct inlays w/ sharp corners.

18 years down the road this is one of my favorite Les Pauls. Love the big round neck profile. It fits my hand like a glove.

Nope all 99-00 had wire like 6100. Tall and wide. The only Les Pauls I'm aware of with 6105 was some USA models like my guitar of the week "Unburst". I refretted that with 6100s like my Millenial Historics. I agree about feel, my favorites for sure.

GreenBurst · May 1, 2018

My Y2K R9 had tall and thin fretwire. It looked taller than normal. I eventually did an HM package D (Braz brd) and had 6105 frets installed. They feel great. I do not find them narrow. Here is a fret size link for reference.

www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Necks/FretSizePop.aspx

The 6100s are huge (like on my Charvel). My Y2K R9 was no where near that size. It felt like extra tall and on the narrow side.

Big Al · May 1, 2018

GreenBurst said:
My Y2K R9 had tall and thin fretwire. It looked taller than normal. I eventually did an HM package D (Braz brd) and had 6105 frets installed. They feel great. I do not find them narrow. Here is a fret size link for reference.

www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Necks/FretSizePop.aspx

The 6100s are huge (like on my Charvel). My Y2K R9 was no where near that size. It felt like extra tall and on the narrow side.

Y2K and 99 were spec'd with 6100 style every one I've played has it. My Y2K is early from May #503. Was there a fret change late in the run? I find it very hard to believe that any R9 had thinner taller wire than 6105. I've never seen any fretwire taller AND as narrow or narower than 6105.

P.Walker · May 1, 2018

It's important to use exact values.

If I may add, in the early-mid 2000s Gibson started using Jescar's 45100 wire, which measures 0.045" x 0.100" like its namesake.

Regarding the frets Gibson was using prior to that, they were slimmer and a little taller. Whether that is Dunlop 6105 or not, I do not know.
The official literature states Dunlop 6105 measures 0.055" x 0.090" which I personally find disproportionately narrow for how tall it is, but that is besides the point.
Jescar has a Dunlop 6105 equivalent of 55090 which measures 0.055" x 0.090" again, like its namesake.

Dunlop 6100 is officially 0.055" x 0.110" which is much wider, but has same height as the Dunlop 6105 and its jescar equivalent. It is commonly the second largest wire after the 6000.
Jescar also has a Dunlop 6100 equivalent of 57110 which measures 0.057" x 0.110" again, like its namesake- A little taller than original Dunlop 6100 but same width.

The fretwire used during the time period of discussion (99, Y2K) was not as large as dunlop 6100s. Hardly close.
In fact, it was narrower and taller than even the jescar 45100 frets of more recent times.
That puts it out of range for a true dunlop 6100 size.

This is corroborated by the guitar in this very thread; the Y2K les paul guitar in the 3rd post has stock frets (most likely because of the binding nibs), and even at a cursory glance those are hardly a sliver of what Dunlop 6100s are.

You can tell 6100 frets from a mile away (figuratively speaking of course).

GreenBurst · May 2, 2018

P.Walker said:
The fretwire used during the time period of discussion (99, Y2K) was not as large as dunlop 6100s. Hardly close.
In fact, it was narrower and taller than even the jescar 45100 frets of more recent times.
That puts it out of range for a true dunlop 6100 size.

This is corroborated by the guitar in this very thread; the Y2K les paul guitar in the 3rd post has stock frets (most likely because of the binding nibs), and even at a cursory glance those are hardly a sliver of what Dunlop 6100s are.

You can tell 6100 frets from a mile away (figuratively speaking of course).

I agree. This was my experience. Tall and narrow. Too tall in fact. When I got it back from HM playability was so much better with the new 6105 frets and the Dave Johnson setup. Very dark Braz brd helped as well.

Mine was from May 2000. S/N was 0683. It has the '99 color.

P.Walker · May 3, 2018

regarding the original question, I think upper 3K is fair.

Big Al · May 3, 2018

I have a stock 99 & 00. I toured and played the 00 enough to need refretting. The closest wire was 6100. They bothh look and feel more similar than not. The Unburst I replaced the 6105 wire with 6100s feels and looks like the 99. I haven't seen any tall narrow frets like 6105s on any I've checked out. My lefty pal Bob's '00 BB54 has according to hin 6100s and he only uses 6100 frets. I do not know how early in the year his was made, I bought my '00 first week of May 2000 and suspect it was built in April.

Greenburst claims, if I read his post right, that stock frets NARROWER AND TALLER than the 6105 wire! I find this impossible to believe.

P.Walker · May 3, 2018

Big Al said:
I have a stock 99 & 00. I toured and played the 00 enough to need refretting. The closest wire was 6100. They bothh look and feel more similar than not. The Unburst I replaced the 6105 wire with 6100s feels and looks like the 99. I haven't seen any tall narrow frets like 6105s on any I've checked out. My lefty pal Bob's '00 BB54 has according to hin 6100s and he only uses 6100 frets. I do not know how early in the year his was made, I bought my '00 first week of May 2000 and suspect it was built in April.

Greenburst claims, if I read his post right, that stock frets NARROWER AND TALLER than the 6105 wire! I find this impossible to believe.

If you have photos of your stock 99 and y2k historic, in their stock state, it'd be much appreciated.

Greenburst and marshall1987 both say they play and feel taller, not that they actually are; that's what I was alluding to when I said 6105 are disproportionately tall for how narrow they are.

When gibson historic went to jescar 45100, many folks commented how wide and buttery (when sliding) they felt, but also noticed the lower feel compared to the previous generation of frets.

Regardless, all the extra stuff and anecdote is just that- extra. It's the dimensions that count in this discussion as I've said above. Dunlop 6100 is 6100 is 0.055" x 0.110" (jescar equivalents are 0.002" taller).

Now you may have 6100 on yours that you had refretted, but in stock form, this period of reissue historics didn't come with 6100 size frets.
The guitar in the 3rd picture, in its most likely stock form, is just one example out of many similar examples. That is no 6100, and I'd like to think I know my frets pretty well.

Other stock examples:

http://www.rollysguitars.co.uk/2009...stom-shop-les-paul-historic-57-reissue-r7-03/

http://www.historiclespauls.com/index.php?action=showgallery&id=530

Not a single 6100 size fret in any of those.

sws1 · May 3, 2018

P.Walker · May 3, 2018

sws1 said:
My 2000 definitely had wire that was slightly taller and narrower than what they use now. But it was not 6105, which I don't like at all and are too "speed bump"-ish. From memory, if I had to guess the dimension... 90 (or maybe 95) x 50

Yup. That's exactly my point

For sure not 45100 or 6100 (0.055" x 0.110")
And not 6105 (the frets on this era les pauls are lower and slightly narrower than true 6105 - 0.055" x 0.090")

latestarter · Feb 1, 2019

1958jr said:
I have seen large variances in asking prices for R9s (in excellent condition) in the 1999-2001 time frame. What is a fair price ?

I see you advertising your '00 for sale, but there's no way of contacting you. We cannot respond to your thread. Be useful if you provided details.

Big Al · Feb 1, 2019

I made a correction on another similar post. I was wrong about fret size. My 2000 has custom ordered specs as it was a Mike Maguire custom build for Yamano that was sent to the HOG by mistake. It has a round deep c neck wit reduced shoulders and a very shalow neck set, the abr almost flush to the top.

My big mistake was not noticeing the tall but narrower frets on other 99-00. dogh!!:##:##

Price Check 2000 era 1959 R9

1958jr

New member

Big Al

Well-known member

marshall1987

Well-known member

sws1

Well-known member

Big Al

Well-known member

marshall1987

Well-known member

latestarter

Well-known member

Big Al

Well-known member

GreenBurst

Active member

Big Al

Well-known member

P.Walker

New member

GreenBurst

Active member

P.Walker

New member

Big Al

Well-known member

P.Walker

New member

sws1

Well-known member

P.Walker

New member

latestarter

Well-known member

Big Al

Well-known member