Basic dimensional differences between the DK and SL series

[shreddermon]

Not this s**t again. I guess I'm going to have to start copywriting my pics now, too? j/k

And, no, the orange-traced 22 fret Dinky is not from the 90s. Not even close. Try 2014, see original thread here:

https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/143271-NGD-Charvel-Custom-Shop-Kids-Art-Graphic-2

[xenophobe]

Not this s**t again. I guess I'm going to have to start copywriting my pics now, too? j/k

And, no, the orange-traced 22 fret Dinky is not from the 90s. Not even close. Try 2014, see original thread here:

https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/14...-Art-Graphic-2

Oh, ok. Sorry. For some reason I thought it was a mid-90's guitar. Well that more lines up with the 2010-ish 22 Fret Soloist body I have pictured above.

[Adam D.]

Bringing the conversation back from the body shapes to necks: looks are important, but for me the most important part of a guitar is the neck.
How consistent is Jackson with the neck profiles and thicknesses as compared to Ibanez for instance?

I know I can pick up an Ibanez and by the feel of it I can generally tell which neck it is.
Prestige guitars have the ultra thin 17mm necks, general Standard lines and a lot of Premiums have a 19.5mm variation of a Wizard,
almost all with the flat back (which I prefer) and the neck-throughs and some bolt on metal oriented guitars have
the same thickness with a round shaped neck, similar to an LTD.
But most Ibanez necks have a flat back, a very easy to feel/spot profile.

What about Jackson? Now they have three different lines as far as I know: the USA made guitars, the Mexican and Indonesian Pros, and the budget JS series,
which I'm not sure about (saw Chinese, Indonesian and even Indian made guitars if memory serves).
How's the neck profile on these? Do they stick with the same profiles and thicknesses, or have different variatons?
I know the compound radius and jumbo frets are standard on almost all guitars, aside from stuff like the Juggernaut Pro.

[diablomozart]

if you want a thin body and neck find a used made in japan stealth...it was jackson's answer to the ibanez saber...d.m.

[shreddermon]

I can't speak to the imports, but USA Jackson necks vary by model. They're mostly "thin", relatively speaking, although some more than others. (I would only consider PC1s to have a truly "thick" neck.) And, of course, there are always exceptions with custom shop guitars. As a general matter with production USA models though, in order from least to most thin, they'd go as follows.

Soloist and RRs
King Vs and Kellys
DK1

[slayer]

if you want a thin body and neck find a used made in japan stealth...it was jackson's answer to the ibanez saber...d.m.

Maybe an SLS as well? I believe they have the thin bodies as well.

[diablomozart]

he wants the in-line headstock...i've only seen sls's with three to a side...d.m.

[Adam D.]

I can't speak to the imports, but USA Jackson necks vary by model. They're mostly "thin", relatively speaking, although some more than others. (I would only consider PC1s to have a truly "thick" neck.) And, of course, there are always exceptions with custom shop guitars. As a general matter with production USA models though, in order from least to most thin, they'd go as follows.

Soloist and RRs
King Vs and Kellys
DK1

Useful info, thanks Shreddermon!
Do you think it's just the additional ca. 1mm thick layer of paint/lacquer on the Soloist or is it a legitimately thicker/different profile than the Dinky?
I'd try for myself if I could, but these US production Jacksons are pretty rare birds in my area, mostly "for order only".
Even the more expensive Pros.

[shreddermon]

No, the DK1 definitely has the thinnest neck profile of all production USA Jacksons. They used to publish the dimensions in older catalogs. I have it on my laptop somewhere, but think it was like .750/.810. More of a "D" profile, while Soloists are more like a thin "C". Very similar - if not the same - as the old Charvel pointyhead necks. And, not sure if it's true, but I've heard rumors through the years that's what Ibanez tried to emulate with the 80s RG necks.

[xenophobe]

Non MIJ imports are all very consistent from what I've experienced. USA up until CNC era varied as they were hand shaped and hand finish sanded. CNC era are cnc profile and hand finish sanded so I would expect much more consistent necks. Maybe someone who has ordered a lot of custom selects, like Ian, can attest to how consistent necks are now.

[diablomozart]

No, the DK1 definitely has the thinnest neck profile of all production USA Jacksons. They used to publish the dimensions in older catalogs. I have it on my laptop somewhere, but think it was like .750/.810. More of a "D" profile, while Soloists are more like a thin "C". Very similar - if not the same - as the old Charvel pointyhead necks. And, not sure if it's true, but I've heard rumors through the years that's what Ibanez tried to emulate with the 80s RG necks.

that'd be the jem neck...for years i swapped between an old strathead charvel and an 88 dy jem...the necks were almost identical...but i could have gotten lucky on the jem too...d.m.

[Mudlark]

Yeah, the USA SL and RR have a slightly thicker, more C shape than the thin D profile often associated with Dinkys...or, many imports for that matter.
The thin D is quite common on imports.
The catalogues in the early 2000's had the neck dimensions. The Jackson site has them to view.

[slayer]

My Jackson Fusion H-H has the neck like an import Dinky, I`ve owned both. The big difference being the scale length.

[Adam D.]

Wow, that's a lot of useful information-again! Thanks a lot gentlemen!
That thin D shape sounds like the ticket! Sounds a heck of a lot like an Ibanez Wizard 2/3 bolt-on neck to me, which is a good thing,
because that's my favourite neck type. Thin and flat back. So apparently I'm looking for an arch top hardtail Dinky, while I thought the Soloist
was THE Jackson for me. Reality strikes again.

On a slightly different note: few days ago I had the chance to try a Pro Series Monarkh as well.
It had a really nice neck, but definitely a different vibe geometry-wise than the thin-flat-D.
I'm not a big Les Paul guy, but aside from some cosmetic flaws, it was a cracking guitar.
LTD ECs are mighty fine instruments, but I'd take the Jackson even with its flaws over an LTD anytime, based on how it felt.
I hope this line will also be popular for Jackson.