Trying to identify (5333)

[JoeManson]

I've had this for quite a while now and just got the urge to do some research on it. Not sure if it's original or not. Figured I'd come here to see what I can find out. Let me know what you think...

[Carbuff]

Looks like its either a holy grail or fake pos. Im sure someone more knowledgeable than I will be by soon.

[CaptNasty]

The neck plate is from a USA guitar. Serial number 5333 should place that guitar somewhere around circa 1986. The headstock is also from a USA made guitar.

I think Charvel while rare, did produce some Flying Vs. Here is an example of one:

http://www.sandimascharvel.com/flyingv.htm

And speaking of holy grails:

http://www.sandimascharvel.com/rrpolka.htm

The body on your guitar to my eyes, looks like the guitars above. Also note that the polka dot Charvel Flying V I linked to above also has a Kahler on it just like yours does. Additionally, they are bolt ones just like yours. There are definitely more experienced Charvel enthusiasts than myself so hopefully one of them comes along and provides a more definitive analysis, but it looks like you very well could have something special there.

What I am surprised by is that Charvel was doing Vs under the Charvel brand instead of the Jackson brand. After all Grover was so concerned about tarnishing the Charvel brand with odd shaped guitars that he created Jackson Guitars specifically to create the Concorde for Randy Rhoads. The original Rhoads polka dot V was not done by Charvel or Jackson, but by Karl Sandoval. The Concorde was the first collaboration with Grover and Rhoads.

[MPI]

What Grover was afraid of was Randy's guitar was neck through construction, and it was a radical shape.
Charvel would build any standard shape. I had a 84/85 era Explorer with a strat bridge one hum. Always wanted a V

[xenophobe]

In 85 or 86 I could imagine seeing that build. Neck looks real, body looks real, plate looks real. Looks legit to me, but I'm not a SD Charvel guy. With all the shenanigans, flip a coin. If it's not documented it might as well be a parts guitar, IMO. Neat.

[Carbuff]

If you search google you come across a few that look just like it with perhaps different pickup config or trem. I thought for sure some of the sd charvel guys would have chimed in by now. Tracey has 2 that look very similar on his website. Do you know the history of the guitar at all?

http://www.usacharvels.com/charvels/4057/4057-15_jpg.html

[shreddermon]

I know a little, but I'm no expert. Hopefully some of the old school guys with much better knowledge and eyes chime in here soon. Anyway, here's what I noticed.

5330 would've been an '86. I can't recall seeing a Charvel V that late, but anything is possible I suppose.

That would've been into the Jackson pickups era. And, maybe it's just the flash in that one closeup pic, but those look like the oversized rings from Jackson PUs. But those PUs look like Duncans- seems like an Invader at the bridge, not sure of the neck. So maybe a PU swap? Or maybe they just used the rings on hand, with the Duncans? (The PUs seem to have patina consistent with the rest of the hardware.).

The finish looks like red with blue pearl (again, maybe it's just the flash) or Ferrari red. Both would be common for that era.

The chrome screws on the Kahler are out of place, likely replacements. But why replace just two screws there? Those alone are odd, and makes me wonder if it's a possible parts mutt. Otherwise seems to look good, though.

Taking the neck off and looking for work order numbers or other info in the neck pocket / heel would help, as well.

Good luck, seems like quite a find in any respect. Prepare for some possible low ball offers. LOL

[Mossezhoffen]

Wow really cool old Charvel! It could be a parts guitar, but to me wear on hardware and parts match the overall wear of
the guitar. At least they look like period correct. Charvel did have a backlog of guitars being made still in 1986. Maybe it was started in 85 and finished in
86. Anything's possible with these. Anyway a really cool find!

[JoeManson]

Unfortunately, I don't have any documentation on it. I've probably had it for about 12 years now. Not looking to get rid of it. It has great action and a really nice sound. So I'm not looking to take it apart to verify.

Thanks for all the responses. I really appreciate it!

[xenophobe]

Unfortunately, I don't have any documentation on it. I've probably had it for about 12 years now. Not looking to get rid of it. It has great action and a really nice sound. So I'm not looking to take it apart to verify.

Thanks for all the responses. I really appreciate it!

Next time you change strings check it out if you want. It might answer a lot of questions. Or not.

[CaptNasty]

What Grover was afraid of was Randy's guitar was neck through construction, and it was a radical shape.
Charvel would build any standard shape. I had a 84/85 era Explorer with a strat bridge one hum. Always wanted a V

“Charvel, at the time, was producing bolt-on, Fender-style guitars. Well, here’s this crazy batwing thing, and I was afraid that might dampen the sales of the Charvels,” Jackson reveals, “so I asked Randy if he would mind if we put a different name on this instrument, because we were going to create this new thing that was not like the other stuff. So it was also out of fear that I didn’t want to piss on what we already had going on.” - Grover Jackson recounting his recollection of how the Concorde came to be

No discussion from Grover regarding concerns over it being a neck through. Grover’s concern was over it being “a crazy batwing thing” when Charvel was producing “bolt-on, Fender-style guitars”. So his concern was all about the shape which made clear by his statement immediately following the “crazy batwing” statement: “and I was afraid that might dampen the sales of the Charvels...”. The reference to bolt-on being used to emphasize “Fender-style” rather than the basis for his concerns.