Photo of the Day
Shoutbox

sysmalakian: TODAY IS MY BIRTHDAY!
362 days ago

dp: dude
343 days ago

Bango_Rilla: Shout Bananas!!
298 days ago

BillyBlastOff: See you kiddies at the Convention!
282 days ago

GDW: showman
233 days ago

Emilien03: https://losg...
155 days ago

Pyronauts: Happy Tanks-Kicking!!!
148 days ago

glennmagi: CLAM SHACK guitar
134 days ago

Hothorseraddish: surf music is amazing
114 days ago

dp: get reverberated!
65 days ago

Please login or register to shout.

IRC Status
  • racc

Join them in the #ShallowEnd!

Need help getting started?

Current Polls

No polls at this time. Check out our past polls.

Current Contests

No contests at this time. Check out our past contests.

Donations

Help us meet our monthly goal:

35%

35%

Donate Now

Cake April Birthdays Cake
SG101 Banner

SurfGuitar101 Forums » Gear »

Permalink Jaguars with thin necks?

New Topic
Page 1 of 1

Can anyone tell me which Jaguars have the thinnest necks?

The neck radius will make a
difference. 7.25" will be thicker
in the middle. I personally like
the Mexican jags with 9.25" radius;
however, overall I think that the
American jags have more comfortable
necks, even though they have 7.25"
radius. Squier Jags might have the
thinnest necks I've played. They also
have 9.25" radius. After that, early
1990s Japanese jags (MIJ made by FujiGen
Gallo) have fairly thin necks. After that,
CIJ Japanese Jaguars made by Dyna Gakki, etc.
seem to be thin, although not as thin
as the MIJ Jags. This is based on models I've
owned. Hope it helps!

Yes, that's a huge help, thanks!

I've read accounts of Squier VM Jags having pretty chunky necks. Mine was average, certainly not nearly as thick as my VM Mustang.

I've heard the new Squier Classic Vibe Jag has a pretty chunky neck also.

mjlee wrote:

I've heard the new Squier Classic Vibe Jag has a pretty chunky neck also.

You're correct. Those necks are the thickest of any Jaguar model I've ever played, and same for the Classic Vibe Jazzmaster, just way too bulky. I was totally going to buy one, but after i felt the neck i just had to pass. I like necks of many shapes and sizes, the thickest neck i own is on a Brian May guitar, and it's big, but it has a good shape, hard for me to explain, some necks just feel right, but those "Classic Vibe" necks felt almost gross, like a blob. It's certainly wrong of Fender/Squier to call those things "Classic Vibe", nothing classic about them.

Sorry, I was remembering that my Squier jag had a fairly thin neck, but I no longer have it and maybe I was remembering wrong. I have 2 Mosrites with extremely thin necks; yet, my Classic Player jag is more comfortable to play. Maybe it's a matter of scale for me, rather than thinness of the neck.

... "Classic Vibe" necks felt almost gross, like a blob. It's certainly wrong of Fender/Squier to call those things "Classic Vibe">

All the vintage Jaguars that I've encountered have very thick, hefty necks. I don't think that the Squier necks or the Classic Player necks for that matter are anywhere near that thick.

I agree that it's best to play one and see for yourself how the neck feels to you. Also, if you find one that sounds good, shaving or sanding the neck might be another option.

I shave guitar necks thinner myself. I don't even take the strings off, and it takes less than an hour. It takes less time than buying and installing a new neck, more so when you include time for changing strings. I use a moto-tool, a sander and sand paper, then I finish with Tung Oil. It makes ordinary guitars amazing.

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 20, 2019 17:31:45

TomH wrote:

All the vintage Jaguars that I've encountered have very thick, hefty necks. I don't think that the Squier necks or the Classic Player necks for that matter are anywhere near that thick.

It's interesting you have found vintage Jags to have thick necks. My 1967 has what seems to me to be a very thin neck, and I love the way it plays and feels. I wasn't aware of much changes over time, but maybe they made the necks with block inlays noticeably thinner.

And on a related note, how would you go about measuring neck thickness in order to compare between guitars? Back to front just next to the nut or maybe a few frets up? I know differences in neck profile and nut width would also make a difference in how it feels in terms of thickness, but it would be nice to have a somewhat standardized way to measure in case of buying/selling a neck on-line.

edwardsand wrote:

And on a related note, how would you go about measuring neck thickness in order to compare between guitars?

With that question I recently measured half a dozen guitars I own, with widely varying neck shapes and thicknesses. I used calipers to measure thickness at several particular frets on each, and I used a flexible fiberglass measuring tape to measure circumference at these frets underneath the strings. There was a clear result: my impression of ease of play corresponded to smaller thickness measured with calipers. This was especially clear for bar (barre) chords. Circumference mattered somewhat but less than simple thickness.

The thinnest guitar neck was almost flat in back. The thickest guitar necks were very rounded, almost circular.

So, for a measure of neck thickness I suggest simple thickness measured with calipers at several frets, e.g., 3, 7, 12.

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 20, 2019 21:26:25

Squid wrote:

So, for a measure of neck thickness I suggest simple thickness measured with calipers at several frets, e.g., 3, 7, 12.

Cool. Are you measuring just before or after the fret? In being a nerd and trying to quantify such things, I wouldn't measure to the top of the fret itself, since frets can be different heights. And the third fret would be one of the most crucial since that's close to where your hand rest for many cowboy chords, and the 12th fret gives you the sense of how it tapers.

I like how you also measured circumference but found that matters less than the measured thickness.

edwardsand wrote:

Cool. Are you measuring just before or after the fret?

I enjoy your interest and your question.

I measure on top of the fret. This is because my hand must span this to hold the strings down. Moreover, I measure on top of the strings, again because this is how far my hand must span to hold the strings down.

This thickness probably reflects the heaviest string not the others because the strings vary in thickness one to the next, but again this is probably the best reflection of my hand span. The calipers I use have flat surfaces on both sides, it looks like the tool called a "try square" with two attachments each perpendicular to the main axis.

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 21, 2019 15:16:13

Squid wrote:

I measure on top of the fret. This is because my hand must span this to hold the strings down. Moreover, I measure on top of the strings, again because this is how far my hand must span to hold the strings down.

This thickness probably reflects the heaviest string not the others because the strings vary in thickness one to the next, but again this is probably the best reflection of my hand span. The calipers I use have flat surfaces on both sides, it looks like the tool called a "try square" with two attachments each perpendicular to the main axis.

To continue the discussion, I see what you are saying, since the ultimate issue is how far you have to stretch out your hand and what feels most comfortable or natural or playable (and of course some people like thicker necks while others prefer thin). I do think though that adding in fret height and string height can make it a bit harder to compare necks on different guitars, since people use different gauges of strings and frets can be worn down over time. So it's likely that measuring on the strings on the top of the fret could potentially give a different result on the same guitar model, depending on string gauge and wear (13s on a new guitar are going to give you a greater thickness than 10s on one with years of playing).

What's really important is the difference in how much your hand has to stretch to reach different frets depending on all the variables of neck thickness (and circumference), string gauge, and fret height. Because string gauge and fret height vary depending on preference and wear, I'd think it's better to leave them out of the equation and just focus on the neck thickness. Then you can look at those numbers and see which is greater or lesser than what seems good to you.

All this is to say I'm a big nerd when it comes to measuring things.

(unintentional duplicate post removed)

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 22, 2019 11:29:11

edwardsand wrote:

Because string gauge and fret height vary depending on preference and wear, I'd think it's better to leave them out of the equation

Differences among guitars in neck thickness are much larger than variations in fret wear they show. Now about string thickness...

On my guitars string thickness varies little from one guitar to another. On some low E strings I use .050 strings, on some .046, and on a few .042. The largest difference in low E string thickness is 0.008 inch. This is less than 1/100 inch and it is much less than variations among guitars in neck thickness.

Variations in fret height (outside of wear) can be meaningfu, but I consider fret height part of the neck thickness. I am not going to remove frets or sand them down to make a neck thinner.

Again, thanks for your questions.

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 22, 2019 11:28:13

Yeah I have a lot of Jag's, Squire, Fender Japan, Fender USA

The real Fenders have more meat near the nut then the Squires on the back of the neck. The Squires seam to be very rounded off under the nut on the back of the neck and less wood there. Besides that the necks seem to be identical. (Real Fenders feel heavier though over all. The Squires are lighter.

There could be a different roundness maybe, but can't tell just looking at it. The Fenders seem to look thicker but measured the same. I will see if I can find my profile tool and check out the necks roundness - The Squires seem to be more like a C neck possibly - Dunno.

Here is a simple measure of neck roundness: The ratio of circumference to thickness. The smaller this ratio the rounder the neck. The larger this ratio the flatter the neck. Both circumference and thickness are measured as I described above.

Below are measurements and impressions of six of my guitars.
The Grn str neck is extremely flat, extremely thin, and super fast.
The Blk stn neck is very circular and as thick as I am ok with.

image

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

Last edited: Jun 22, 2019 23:02:57

mjlee wrote:

I've heard the new Squier Classic Vibe Jag has a pretty chunky neck also.

It's all relative. The best thing is to try it out if you can. There are variations even in a CNC production guitar, and profile shape and neck width will change the feel for a person. For me, a thin neck is anything less than 0.85" (21.6mm) measured at the first fret, with a C, D, or V profile. I prefer baseball bat necks, and my favorite is a Telecaster with 1 inch at the 1st and 1 inch at the 12th. It has a C profile. Anything between 0.90" (22.9mm) and 1 inch is where I prefer my necks, with a C or U profile. I avoid Vs because they feel 'thin' even with a 1 inch thickness.

My Classic Vibe 70s Jag is not that chunky to me. It's 0.88" (22.4mm) at the 1st fret, and 0.93" (22.6mm) at the 12th fret. I'm guessing that's too much to be called thin by most, but I barely notice.

Note that I'm measuring right next to the fret, ignoring the fret itself. Center of the top of the fretboard to the center of the back of the neck. No strings. This seems to be how most people compare, plus the general profile shape. Wildwood Guitars is one of the few sellers who post neck measurements in the same way. It seems to me more recent Jags are pretty thin, again, relative to my idea of what thin is.

Well, Border, add 1 mm for fret height and 1 mm for string thickness and your measurements show that your 70s Jag is thicker than all six guitars I measured. Differences are larger near the nut.

My glove size is large. I suppose yours is extra large.

Insanitizers! http://www.insanitizers.com

A year ago I measured the necks of some of my guitars.
Nut measurement is the fretboard width at the nut (body side) using a digital caliper.
Neck thickness was measured with a 6-1/4" outside caliper from the center of the fretboard to the center of the back of the neck. The distance between the jaws of the outside caliper was measured with a digital caliper.
1st fret thickness was measured directly behind the 1st fret (nut side).
12th fret thickness was measured directly behind the 12th fret (nut side).

1995 MIJ Jaguar
Nut width: 1-41/64" (1.64") (42mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .82" (20.8 mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .91" (23.1mm)

2006 CIJ Jaguar Special HH
Nut width: 1-21/32" (1.66") (42.2mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .83" (21.1mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .93" (23.6mm)

2006 MIA '62 AVRI Jaguar "modern C-shape"
Nut width: 1-43/64" (1.67) (42.4mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .82" (20.8mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .90" (22.9mm)

2017 MIA AV '65 Jaguar "mid-60s C-shape"
Nut width: 1-11/16" (1.69") (42.9mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .84" 21.3mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .98" (24.9mm)

2005 CIJ '69 Mustang
Nut width: 1-19/32" (1.59") (40.4mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .81" (20.6mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .93" (23.6mm)

2004 American Deluxe 50th Anniversary Stratocaster
Nut width: 1-11/16" (1.69") (42.9mm)
Thickness at 1st fret: .86" (21.8mm)
Thickness at 12th fret: .89" (22.6mm)

Page 1 of 1
Top