• 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!

Nut end finish on 2013 les Pauls

Jim W

Active member
Joined
Aug 14, 2002
Messages
727
I was at a dealer that had several 2013 reissues, and noticed that the ends of the nut on the guitar I was looking at was completely plain, with no lacquer finish on it, very clean looking.

It looked for all the world like the nut had been replaced, not a trace of finish.

I started looking at all the 2013's, and noticed that most of the nuts were plain/clean, or that the lacquer had mostly chipped away from the nut leaving this clean look.

I hadn't seen this before; is there something different about the 2013's?
 

steve(UK)

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
972
I was at a dealer that had several 2013 reissues, and noticed that the ends of the nut on the guitar I was looking at was completely plain, with no lacquer finish on it, very clean looking.

It looked for all the world like the nut had been replaced, not a trace of finish.

I started looking at all the 2013's, and noticed that most of the nuts were plain/clean, or that the lacquer had mostly chipped away from the nut leaving this clean look.

I hadn't seen this before; is there something different about the 2013's?

Interesting. Well, sounds like those nuts had either been changed post build completion for some reason, or Gibson fitted them after painting. But I'm at a loss to explain 'why' for either. As we all know, it's easier to fit the nut then lacquer over the ends as arguably it produces a neater, smoother finish. Maybe the lacquer had a red tinge or something that perhaps looked odd on the ends of the nut? dunno.
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
Maybe the laqure doesn't adhere to nylon very well?
 

Uncle Gary

Active member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
2,431
Maybe the laqure doesn't adhere to nylon very well?

That's it right there. On my '12 (only guitar with a nylon nut), the clear lacquer had already separated from the nylon nut and was just adhering at the edges. I ran a drop of superglue down between the nut and the lacquer to keep it from chipping further.

I've seen this chipping on most new Gibsons with nylon nuts.
 

fjminor

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2005
Messages
3,623
Maybe the dealer removed the nut to check for a 2 piece fretboard, leftovers from 2012 with a 2013 stamp.:spabout :worm
 

moonweasel

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
9,427
Maybe the new guitars dont have a tinted clear like my 2004 R4 does, so the lacquer might still be there, but just doesn't show up without looking closely?
 
K

Kim R

Guest
Maybe the laqure doesn't adhere to nylon very well?

That is exactly the situation.

As a preventative to further peeling/chipping, I think it's a good idea to cut the lacquer seam around the nylon. Perhaps they have begun to do this at the CS, or knowledgeable dealers are taking care of it.

The lacquer formula will be "next," followed by by pickup covers :hmm

In any case, the new guitars are really fine.
 

class5lp

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
1,629
I have had many reissues that I bought new and had lacquer over the ends of the nut and in due time it flaked off. Lacquer does not seem to adhere well on the nut material. Perfectly normal as is aging of the nickel hardware if you ask me.
 

steve(UK)

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
972
Hang on, nylon nuts? don't tell me Gibson are using nylon nuts on Historics now? or are people (as I suspect) using "nylon" in the generic sense of the term to describe nuts made from a synthetic, man-made material? If so, they're not really nylon, more 'hard plastic' (thermo-setting). Nylon is a flexible material (thermo-plastic) that doesn't readily file to dust, it 'rags', you couldn't successfully file a nylon nut. So to be generic, "plastic" or "hard plastic" is the way to go. That's the harder, more 'bone-like' material. But.... looking at the Gibson spec, they call it nylon. So there you go, it's nylon! Well, 'Gibson nylon', and that could be anything..
 

frenchphil

Active member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
1,223
i had lacquer on the nut on my 2010 r9, it was peeling off, so i took it away

no issue about that just cosmetic

when i discovered that i did not know what it was, it looked like the nut hab been shiled down so it made me wonder (i bought second hand)

but no, the nut was fine, and original, just the lacquer peeling off

and when i asked on the forum, nobody thought about the lacquer
 

Uncle Gary

Active member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
2,431
Hang on, nylon nuts? don't tell me Gibson are using nylon nuts on Historics now? or are people (as I suspect) using "nylon" in the generic sense of the term to describe nuts made from a synthetic, man-made material? If so, they're not really nylon, more 'hard plastic' (thermo-setting). Nylon is a flexible material (thermo-plastic) that doesn't readily file to dust, it 'rags', you couldn't successfully file a nylon nut. So to be generic, "plastic" or "hard plastic" is the way to go. That's the harder, more 'bone-like' material. But.... looking at the Gibson spec, they call it nylon. So there you go, it's nylon! Well, 'Gibson nylon', and that could be anything..

Nylon is what they used in the 50's. I'm old enough to remember when nylon was the "latest and greatest" among the thermoplastics and the "wave of the future". It's hardness depends on the grade of the nylon. I had a nylon rear sprocket on a motorcycle once, and it outlasted steel in the same service.

FWIW, I've filed the nut slots on my '12 Historic, and lowered and polished the top surface of the "nylon" nut, and it "works" just FINE with files and fine sandpaper, in fact it polished to a high luster. Additionally, I get no "sticking" of the strings in the slots since nylon is self lubricating. I'm not sure what nylon grade Gibson is using for these nuts (and it's definitely not the Corian they used to use, either), but I'd like to get some of it for nuts on some of my other guitars.
 

fjminor

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2005
Messages
3,623
Hang on, nylon nuts? don't tell me Gibson are using nylon nuts on Historics now? or are people (as I suspect) using "nylon" in the generic sense of the term to describe nuts made from a synthetic, man-made material? If so, they're not really nylon, more 'hard plastic' (thermo-setting). Nylon is a flexible material (thermo-plastic) that doesn't readily file to dust, it 'rags', you couldn't successfully file a nylon nut. So to be generic, "plastic" or "hard plastic" is the way to go. That's the harder, more 'bone-like' material. But.... looking at the Gibson spec, they call it nylon. So there you go, it's nylon! Well, 'Gibson nylon', and that could be anything..

Guys, I've done some more searching and found the specs for the 50th re-issue. Seems like they have done quite a bit to keep us quiet!

Any comments nonetheless about accuracy, issues missed etc?



This is your quote a few years back-Seems like you knew back in 2009 Gibson was using nylon for the nut, why the surprise now ?
 
Last edited:

steve(UK)

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
972
This is your quote a few years back-Seems like you knew back in 2009 Gibson was using nylon for the nut, why the surprise now ?

Lol, wha?! What the hell are you getting at? You've reproduced two totally unrelated quotes (and obviously spent hours digging them out!) and offer them forwards in some sort of vain attempt to say that I have ('merely', FWIW) changed my view? And the laugh is, it doesn't even show that!!. As anyone who can read will tell you, there's no correlation whatsoever wrt nylon nuts in those two quotes. Jesus mate, get some better evidence before trying to stitch me up with such ridiculous nonsense! Hey, son of Columbo, You need to get out more!
 

fjminor

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2005
Messages
3,623
Lol, wha?! What the hell are you getting at? You've reproduced two totally unrelated quotes (and obviously spent hours digging them out!) and offer them forwards in some sort of vain attempt to say that I have ('merely', FWIW) changed my view? And the laugh is, it doesn't even show that!!. As anyone who can read will tell you, there's no correlation whatsoever wrt nylon nuts in those two quotes. Jesus mate, get some better evidence before trying to stitch me up with such ridiculous nonsense! Hey, son of Columbo, You need to get out more!

.
 
Top