Official Luthiers Forum!
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=17308		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Andy Matthews [ Thu May 22, 2008 9:54 am ]
Post subject:  Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
I've been thinking out neck joint methods for a long while now, and I'm currently looking into trying out a heel-less bolt on system on my next guitar. The only guitar I can think of with something similar was the big baby, so i got my hands on one and had a little looksie! Like Taylor's other neck systems it's got a replaceable shim to change neck angle, and I can tell you now, the pocket's good and snug!
On these guitars screwheads are visible on the fretboard face, and I'd have to think of a way to avoid this. So far I've been thinking along the lines of captive nuts/threaded inserts in the back of the neck, with attachment bolts threaded in from the inside of the instrument, through the block extension. I'd like to also incorporate simple neck angle adjustment using a set screw method like can be seen in this thread on the MIMF (a great read by the way)
http://www.mimf.com/cgi-bin/WebX?128@15 ... @.2cb67378
Routing the pocket will be a simple task with a jig, making the neck will certainly be easy! So I'm wondering if anyone else has had a shot? (and if not, why not?)
My only concerns so far are considering how the load of the strings will be distributed around the guitar compared to a normal tenon or dovetail, and wether all this will result in an overly heavy instrument.

Anyway - Discuss, I suppose! :) Any reference links/ideas would be appriciated.

Also, I've attached some pics of the big baby's joint (and some other inside shots just for fun)

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
Author:  Dave White [ Thu May 22, 2008 10:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
Jammy,

My Tacoma Papoose has a similarish neck join but the bots go into the neck from the back. Also an English builder Kif Wood uses a similar system - any builder that makes a guitar for Johhny Depp has to be way cool 8-)
Author:  Bob Garrish [ Thu May 22, 2008 10:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
Well, I suppose I have to ask the obvious question: How'd you get those super-clear inside shots of the guitar?
Author:  Andy Matthews [ Thu May 22, 2008 10:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
Bob Garrish wrote:
Well, I suppose I have to ask the obvious question: How'd you get those super-clear inside shots of the guitar?


Place the camera on the back of the instrument and tip it up slightly (so it's good and stable), macro focus, flash on. Easy!
Author:  Pat Foster [ Thu May 22, 2008 11:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
Jammy,

You've probably thought about this, given your background.

From the picture of the neck/end block, I can't tell how its two pieces are connected, but I'd want to be sure that it's more than a simple glued joint. Seems like there would be a lot of stress there that wants to push the laminated part down towards the back and also towards the bridge. Those same forces are in compression at the top of the M/T in a traditional neck joint - this one is in tension. Also I'd want some of the torsional stress of the neck/end block to be taken up by the back rather than just the top and sides, so I'd probably extend the neck block down to the back as in the usual neck block. Seems to me there's a particular risk in this guitar in that the neck block ends at the plate/side joint, which has no lining. And something tells me there needs to be at least three fasteners holding the neck. But then Bob Taylor is no dummy, so his system must work.

Just my two cents (pence?) worth.

Be sure and post pics of what you come up with!
Author:  Andy Matthews [ Thu May 22, 2008 11:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
My thoughts exactly!

I was considering a U shaped neck block (if that makes sense). Either that or bracing the block to the waist with carbon rods which seems to becoming more popular.
Thanks for your input
Author:  Erik Hauri [ Thu May 22, 2008 11:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
Fender's Kingman/Shenandoah and Malibu/Villager from the late 60s had bolt-on necks that went through the entire neck block from the back with four big long wood screws, neck plate and all. Very "electric" style. The 12-string Villagers and Shenandoahs are notorious for having the neck block rotate under tension just like Pat is speculating...in most of them the neck block moves before the bridge lifts (go figure...). For that reason, Fender started to install a long aluminum tube that ran from the neck block to the heel block.

They called it a "tone bar". laughing6-hehe Though you could also get a tamborine effect from stuff that would rattle around inside the tube. [xx(]

Compared with the Big Baby, Fender's neck block is larger and glued securely to the back...so I would expect the Big Baby to fare not-quite-as-well as Fender's bolt-on experiment, though perhaps the lower tension of only 6 strings mitigates that somewhat.
Author:  Jody [ Thu May 22, 2008 6:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
I have an old silvertone with the neck system like that , the neck was off when I got it , have not tried to set it yet .I would think light or ultra light strings though ... . Jody
Author:  Andy Matthews [ Fri May 23, 2008 10:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Heel-less bolt on neck joints (a little picture-heavy)
I've started drawing up some plans so I can have a go at this soon - it's going ok :)
A question to throw out there though....

In a neck joint like the one pictured above, which would be the most critical mating surfaces for sound transmission do you think?
Obviously the largest face which is clamped tight with the fixings is critical, but how about the end of the neck/mortise, or the sides?

The reason I ask is in the plans I've drawn up the mortise is reasonably shallow. Though it's easy to make it deeper, I'm just wondering wether there's any need?. Anyway - another little musing for the grey matter. Thanks for the replies so far guys!
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/