What corners were cut on the production models

[Flatpicker]

What they "are" was what we were originally trying to figure out.

Actually, we were trying to figure out what corners were cut on the production Charvels.
This topic has gone left, right, and sideways since the OP. EVT derailed this thread and we never got it back on track.

[Grandturk]

So if we want to get back on-topic, we have to figure out what corners were cut:

If the retail on a Custom Shop Charvel is $2600 and the retail on a production Charvel is 1100, then the company has to "cut corners" in order to reduce cost to them. In that regard, I would say the "corners cut" on the production Charvels are thus:

- Build on a production line vs. small batch/individual orders (higher volume increases economy of scale - the Henry Ford innovation)
- Sub-effect of production line - limit options (again, the Henry Ford "Any color you want as long as its black)

- Reduce component cost (lower tier wood selection, cheaper hardware)

- Reduce production time (less time spent on setup, QA - although based on what I've heard about some Custom Shop experiences...)

- Have lower wage employees run the production line

- Limit add-ons (gig bag vs. case)

All of this combined would let Charvel produce a guitar that costs less than a Custom Shop. And I believe these ARE killer guitars.

[beachjammer]

Not to mention the fact that custom shop guitars probably have a high mark up to begin with. I'd say most of us would drop a brick if we knew how much it actually cost to build our guitars vs what we pay for them. Point being that FMIC/Charvel might have lowered their profit margin per guitar and opted to sell more guitars at less profit instead of fewer guitars at more profit. I think this concept combined with the above mentioned things would get the price down to where it's at IMO.

[Rich#6]

I think to be fair we need to compare these guitars to the 2005 pointies and the 2002 MIJ ones.
I think in 2005 you could get a one humbucker, ebony board, oiled neck, and real OFR on a black or red guitar for MAP of $1600 made by the CS guys just like the Jackson Selects. I know the one I have ( vtrem, RGF, ebony board, oiled neck and one hum was originally purchased for $1445)
all high quality, no paint flaws and the qtrsawn neck grain looks top notch
2002 you could get a MIJ charvel high end was MAP around $1040 for the Model A that had ebony board, qtrsawn oiled neck, quilt top, and Takauchi JT580-I have owned 3 model A's, an A+ and a Traditional(rosewood board and I had to strip and oil the neck myself).
Before I make a comparison I need to say that I love my So-Cal. Great tone and the neck shape is near perfect.
Now for the where they cut corners/ fall short (comparing it to both the Pointies and MIJ):
No fretboard options(the ebony boards were the best on the MIJ, over my pointy), The qtrsawn wood on mine doesn't even look like it is. The neck needs more sanding(about the same as the MIJ). The neck doesn't even feel like it has any oil on it at all-much worse then even the MIJ). The back of the body on the USA prodcution you can see a lack of sanding showing through the paint-no issues on the other 2. This are issues I have only seen on starter guitars. I can't say anything about fretwork since I bought all of mine used. If these were MIJ they probably would have less flaws and would be a little bit more price wise then the Jackson DK2M. I am sure that the CNC machines are the same quality in both places. you can just charge more if it's made in the USA and sell more to the USA guitar snobs( no offense).
Most of these issues can be easily fixed. A few minutes more on the sanding and oiling the neck. The back of the body should be easy too. The neck wood however really bugs me.
Oh!
Not quality issues but I know most people hate the knob. I think it looks faded against the black pickguard and it would look better if it wasn't flat on top.
the pickguard looks ok but I think these guitars don't look good with the multiply ones.

[AndyK]

I would really love to hear from Bionic if the wood on the necks or bodies of the production guitars is sub-standard compared to the wood on the CS guitars. Where does one go to find cheap Poplar or Ashe wood, to cut corners? Doesn't make any sense to me.

I can see if the bodies on the production guitars are made with 3 pieces instead of 2, or mass produced to lower cost. But cheaper wood?

Mike?

[Grandturk]

I would really love to hear from Bionic if the wood on the necks or bodies of the production guitars is sub-standard compared to the wood on the CS guitars. Where does one go to find cheap Poplar or Ashe wood, to cut corners? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Look, its not like they call up the supplier and say, "Hey, Joey - give me a couple pallets of the good stuff and a couple of pallets of absolute shit with knots and mineral stains so I can trick dumbasses."

But they do have choice wood and less-choice wood. I wouldn't think that any wood used in these guitars is considered "sub-standard." Its just not going to be the same quality as the best stuff. Obviously the most expensive would be large light peices that can be used for 1-piece bodies, then smaller pieces they can use for 2-piece bodies. Then there's degrees of mass - the heavier stuff gets pushed down the line for use elsewhere.

Like I said, these are not crap guitars, and they're not "sub-standard." They're just not made with the same care, attention and cost as Custom Shop models. And I wouldn't expect them to be. Christ I can't even figure out how they pay the custom shop guys a decent wage based on the cost of the Custom Shop guitars.

[Grandturk]

Oh yeah, welcome to page 11.

Spinal Tap reference anyone?

[Flatpicker]

I would really love to hear from Bionic if the wood on the necks or bodies of the production guitars is sub-standard compared to the wood on the CS guitars. Where does one go to find cheap Poplar or Ashe wood, to cut corners? Doesn't make any sense to me.

I can see if the bodies on the production guitars are made with 3 pieces instead of 2, or mass produced to lower cost. But cheaper wood?

Mike?

It's not substandard. But, it's probably not as visually appealing for a clear stain.
It may have mismatched grain or a couple of knots that don't hurt the tone or playability, but dosen't look good stained.

[AndyK]

It's not substandard. But, it's probably not as visually appealing for a clear stain.
It may have mismatched grain or a couple of knots that don't hurt the tone or playability, but dosen't look good stained.

Which is what ANY guitar company does with not-so-pretty wood, solid color it! Gibson definitely does it with the Gold Tops, and I guess Fender does it too.

So if the wood is just fugly, but the same quality, that's one less corner cutting move.

[Grandturk]

Fender traditionally used Ash for bursts and Alder for solids. Nobody wants to see ugly, bent wood.

[Jacksonite]

the way the wood is chosen,

type a wood (the regular stuff) is sent to the mass produced guitars
type b wood (the good stuff) is sent to the deluxe produced guitars (fender deluxe stuff)
type c wood (the better stuff) is sent to the hand produced guitars (jackson production)
type d wood (the best stuff ) is sent to the custom shop (jackson/charvel/gretsch)

the biggest corner cut, is the non "select" wood, and the fact that they are made on a production line with a machine that cuts 8 necks and 8 bodies at a time, instead of pablo cutting 1 body at a time in the custom shop. they are painted on a production line, and not one at a time. they wire em up in an assembly line fashion istead of a "workbench" (i may be wrong about this, i get to go to the factory soon)

Mike,
Correct me if I am wrong

[straycat]

To be honest mine is a very high quality guitar IMO. Nice flame maple neck,awesome fret work,tight neck pocket.Very resonant body,perfect paint no dips or flaws anywhere.The floyd works great and is not an issue.No pickguard on mine so no issue there.
Set up was decent for a line guitar.
Being a very early production guitar may have something to do with it I don't know.

[Spivonious]

Oh yeah, welcome to page 11.

Spinal Tap reference anyone?

Middle of page 4 for me

[charvel pointy head]

You are not taking into account for the intangible.
The Fender name commands more $$$ than the Charvel name.
It's a legitimate factor when comparing two similar products.

I'm sure the "parts" used to build both lines have similar upfront costs involved, but a guitar is not just the sum of it's parts in the open market.

If that were the case, there are some kick ass no name Japanese and Korean LP copies that should be priced in the same range as a production model USA LP.
And some of these imports absolutely smoke most off the shelf Gibson LP's when it comes to build quality and attention to detail.
I'm not talking CS or limited edition LP's, just regular production crap.

Who remembers back when they could not give Les Pauls away, real ones, customs. Used to be available in early to mid 80's for UNDER 800 here in kc just to get them out the door. Frankly you guys want to talk about an overpriced guitar. well there is your les paul built today, with it's fake pearloid greenish tint markers, orange peel finish quality, oh and it's 3 THOUSAND dollar price tag that goes out the door with everyone they make. It's a vibe think. If you ask me, a cnc machine makes a more consistant product, whereas a pin router engenders inconsistancy, at least potentially. Oh, and I'll bet if you go to Nashvile, they use cnc machines on teh les paul line.

[Dogbone]

I remember ^^^^^^^ bought my Les Paul Standard (cherryburst) back in 84 for 400 bucks, with an Anvil flight case It was used, but looked like new
I guess that is why I have a hard time justifying what they cost now