Suhr and Charvel necks

[The Rossness]

For anyone out there who knows Suhr and Charvel guitars, I could Use some help-

I'm thinking about getting a Suhr Pro M of some sort, but I'm having trouble deciding on a neck shape.

For the last few years, I've been playing the Charvel USA/ Japanese Pro Mods. I am in love with their necks! For whatever the reason in, the production models/ pro mods have a different feeling neck than the Charvel Custom Shop and Warren DeMartini models (those feel too small to me). I think I've had about 10 Pro Mods. Of all the production models that I've owned, the two I like the most are a USA Slime Green San Dimas and a Japanese Wildcard San Dimas that's painted in grey primer. The Japanese pro mod has a neck that feels slightly thinner than my Slime green charvel, but has more or less the same profile.

This brings me to my initial question- Which Suhr neck shape would best resemble a Charvel Production Model/ Pro Mod guitar? I've seen 3 shapes- "Thin C", "Extra Thin C", and "Modern Elliptical". Which Suhr neck shape would best resemble a Production model/ Pro Mod neck?

[Flatpicker]

For an up-charge you used to be able to send Suhr your neck to have it duplicated.

Thin C is probably closest for a production shape.
Extra Thin C is closer to Ibanez Wizard IIRC.

[The Rossness]

Where does the modern elliptical fit in?

[Flatpicker]

Where does the modern elliptical fit in?

I think that's closer to the GG model.

[ginsambo]

I think a slightly wider neck can make it feel thinner, when in reality the profile might be the exact same. That is what I found with the later Jap pro mods compared to my slime green USA and wildcard, they felt thinner, more Jacksony, although some of the earlier maple boarded ones were spot on. In reality, those USA pro mod necks had a very narrow 2 1/4" heel almost more towards a Fender feel/sizing with a 2 3/16", where as the later models of the Japanese ones had a strict 2 1/4" heel. Heel size, as well as everything else is definitely something to consider when comparing your suhr, as it'll have a big influence on the feel all the way down the neck, even though the nut width may be identical.

[MikeStrat]

From my personal experience, the Suhr necks were not as comfortable as the Charvel necks. It could be because I've been playing Charvel for a long time. I just never bonded with the guitar due to the neck. That's one of those things you have to try and decide.

[shredmonster]

Suhr necks are not as comfortable as Charvel necks IMO also. I have played many many Suhrs - Teles, Strats, Moderns..... Charvel has about the best neck in the business.

What you want from Suhr is a D shaped neck.

[Flatpicker]

Suhr necks are not as comfortable as Charvel necks IMO also. I have played many many Suhrs - Teles, Strats, Moderns..... Charvel has about the best neck in the business.

What you want from Suhr is a D shaped neck.

I'd like to propose an idea to the people who say the Charvel necks are the best.

Could we decide on a neck that exists in the hands of a JCF'er that epitomizes the Charvel neck.
Work with a Forum Dealer to send that neck to Suhr for duplication, then have a small run of SuhrVels made with that neck to see if it can be replicated?
Seems if we get it right it could become a stock spec for any manufacturer to use.


It would seem to be a good idea for those who like the necks yet are disappointed in the direction Charvel has gone in.

Would anybody be game to try?