Question regarding Japan Charvel Necks

[dismalswamp]

Hi, I have a 2011 (i believe) MIJ Charvel So-Cal. The neck finish is a poly satin, not a raw oil rubbed neck. The guitar sounds and plays great and came with an SKB case as normal.
Now I have been told by a certain self proclaimed Charvel expert that this guitar must be a fake due to the neck. News to me as the guitar came with the original shop receipt and hang tag - I purchased from eBay and have no reason to suspect it being counterfeit at all. The finish and quality is far too good.
Can anyone shed any light on the finish of the Japanese necks? Where they all oil rubbed as I've read on other forums that Japanese Charvel's were supplied with poly finished necks?
Many thanks.

[paranoid]

All the made in Japan wild cards that I have (4-8) have a kinda satin finish, slightly Different from my made in US models wild cards 1 and 3, and the three Vanhalen models I own. none of them are like the necks I sand and rub with bore oil. I think the factory made in japan models are rubbed with a gun stock type oil that hardens on the surface. I would not think the guitar you have is a fake.

[Axewielder]

Pics?

[dismalswamp]

Thank-you, I will put some pics up.

[dismalswamp]

https://photos.app.goo.gl/mwQcJK3FCtnNOcei1

https://photos.app.goo.gl/GAXUV8Z8ygsvYIT02

https://photos.app.goo.gl/JemJmod7ZBmav4xi1

https://photos.app.goo.gl/eSojwfvvEe3zTyE63

https://photos.app.goo.gl/0XHtcpgFpOXL8Hnq2

https://photos.app.goo.gl/hRazzpGiEooKd3fQ2

https://photos.app.goo.gl/SEbe0aiYWSZcRA5M2

https://photos.app.goo.gl/qAa4Ey7HvnDXkBOx1

https://photos.app.goo.gl/zyXM7JQarkZeo4t93

[Number Of The Priest]

Your So-Cal looks fine. See mine, a 2011 So-Cal Candy Red, for comparison: https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/15...al-(Candy-Red)

Though, the "Made in Japan" area of the headstock logo does look odd (the font is misshapen), and there are two different tints in the wood around the headstock logo. What happened there?

[dismalswamp]

Mine does look just like the one you posted. I haven't noticed the tints really and I hadn't noticed the logo until it was pointed out to me. I bought the guitar originally from a proper ebay dealer and it has always been as it is now. Only when dealing with eBay has this come to light, being accused of selling a counterfeit Charvel, when clearly it isn't. The guitar plays beautifully and the finish is of a very high standard, I don't believe it is anything but factory finish as have read other threads describing poly finished necks on Japanese models. I think it more a case of this neck being 'different' to one that was expected. As always Paypal behave in a completely unreasonable manner. I have offered to accept a return after stating my case that I have not refinished the neck and it was bought like that.
I am fearing a buyer scam unfortunately and after the hours spent on deliberating whether to let this go or not (i really want a USA custom) am quite riled!

[Number Of The Priest]

I took a break from online guitar discussions during the days of the Charvel USA Production Models and Charvel Japan Pro-Mods so I missed seeing the specification sheets when they were released. However, as I currently understand, and based on what I've seen in the real world, the Japanese Pro-Mods were produced with identical specifications to the USA Production Models, except slightly reduced in price, included the SKB case we both have, and the San Dimas guitars received chrome hardware (So-Cals kept their black hardware).

Specification sheet for the USA Production Models can be found here: https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/14...=1#post1666155

Note that the neck finish says "gunstock oil" on the USA guitars. Therefore the Japanese guitars should also have gunstock oiled necks. I own both an American So-Cal and a Japanese So-Cal and should be able to speak authoritatively on both, but a previous owner sanded the finish off my Japanese one, thus nullifying my ability to help in this circumstance since I don't know if it did have a gunstock oil finish or a poly satin finish as yours might have.

Nothing about your So-Cal looks inauthentic to me.

So you're trying to sell your So-Cal and the buyer is accusing you of listing a fake guitar? In this scenario, the only thing I can empathize with the buyer is the headstock/logo issues I previously identified, which are indeed peculiar, but the empathy stops there because they don't make your guitar a counterfeit.

[druckpig]

I bought the Guitar in question.
There are various issues which point to the guitar definitely being a fake and I would like to point out that the OP has Misrepresented some of the Facts and I will attempt to support My own findings.
I will add some pictures of the actual guitar.

First The finish on the Neck is NOT satin It is a very thick high gloss poly and it is very poorly done.

The Most Important Fact which leads me to claim it is a fake neck is the fact the fretboard does NOT have 12" - 16" compound radius. It has actually a 12" radius for the whole of the fretboard. That alone tells me the neck is fake
The Charvel decal is obviously not right.
The fretwork is Very poor sharp ends and not even the right size fretwire..
The plinth that the locking nut sits on is very uneven.

No Compound radius is conclusive as far as I am concerned ...FAKE

[dismalswamp]

Are you able to post a comparison with that neck and the one you are judging it against? Now if someone else has done something to the neck without my knowledge or the knowledge of who I originally bought it off that is one thing, but you claiming the guitar is fake when others on here have clearly pointed out it isn't is another. As for the sharp edges, that is an out and out lie, the fretboard is fantastic and rolled to perfection. In my opinion that is a similar satin finish to my Fender Corgan, nothing like a mirror gloss on a MIJ Stratocaster. This is of course subjective and I have granted your return without a fuss, only to defend myself against accusations of counterfeiting, hence coming on here to seek advice from the Charvel community. If you are not happy with the guitar then return it, otherwise release the payment. Whichever you decide can you do it quickly please? We should not be having ebay squabbles on a Charvel forum.

[Number Of The Priest]

Good to hear both sides of the story. Let's both remain civil here as we try to assemble all the facts.

My following commentary will contain scenarios that should, in no way, be construed as accusations against either party, but merely I am trying to remain impartial in commenting on various things I am clearly seeing, based on evidence presented in both parties' photographs.

In light of druckpig revealing that the neck has a glossy poly finish, I realize I now do see the gloss on dismalswamp's photos, which is probably why the photo of the headstock face shows "two different tints" that I identified previously. The "two different tints" might actually be a reflection of something behind the camera, reflected only because of a shiny (gloss) finish. It would not be present if the headstock face were finished matte. The headstocks on both my So-Cals do not reflect anything.

I agree, the USA Production Model spec sheet lists a 12-16" compound radius. And because I have always believed the Japanese Pro-Mods had identical specs to the American ones that preceded, the Japanese guitars should technically also have the 12-16" radius. As a favor to both of you, I can measure the radius on both my American and Japanese So-Cal tonight and share the results here. I'll post photos of my radius gauges sitting on my 1st and 22nd frets to demonstrate the compound effect. druckpig, can you do the same if you have some gauges?

Can either of you gentlemen also share photos of the entire back of the neck? Every American and Japanese Pro-Mod I've seen, including my own, have very obvious parallel grain running down the length of the neck, and even showing on the back of the headstock. The photos both of you have shared so far don't really highlight this quartersawn grain. This may or may not help in identification, but please just oblige me, if nothing else for my own amusement.

One possibility is that the owner previous to dismalswamp had the guitar refretted, re-radiused, and sanded the original gunstock oil and logo off the entire neck, and then added a new logo and refinished the neck and headstock in gloss poly. Strange, but possible. That nut shelf does look awful though. Again, not an accusation against either party... just commenting on what I'm seeing as an impartial third party.

Another possibility is that the neck is fake, but honestly, why try to fake a Japanese Pro-Mod So-Cal? I can see why a counterfeiter might want to replicate an 80s San Dimas era Charvel, but not a mass-produced modern mid-priced guitar like a Japanese So-Cal.

[druckpig]

I just told you the neck does NOT have a 12" - 16" compound radius ?

Does that not mean anything to you I can assure you that the lack of a compound radius is conclusive that the neck is a fake..
Wake up it's a Fake neck.
The guitar will be returned to you as agreed but it will be done as soon as I have time to get to it.
I was only issued a return label late yesterday afternoon so it was too late to ship yesterday and I am still working at the moment.
I paid you on the 19th for this guitar and didnt even ship it until the 27th so you can wait like I did until it is convenient.

If you bother to look at the pics you will see 2 charvel headstock 1 is yours with a high gloss finish and the other is my own So cal with an UNFINISHED neck...

I dont CLAIM the neck is fake it is..
NO COMPOUND RADIUS IS FAKE

[dismalswamp]

I paid you on the 19th for this guitar and didnt even ship it until the 27th so you can wait like I did until it is convenient.

I did tell you before you even paid that I was away until that date, so please refrain from the 'didn't even ship it' inferring to the audience here that I simply couldn't be bothered.

Weeks ago you contacted me (before buying) asking about the neck as you didn't feel it looked right. I told you then that it have a satin finish (subjective I know) and that I had not tampered with it and as far as I was aware everything about the instrument was sound. I don't have a bagful of Charvels to compare it to and this one feels exactly the same as the one I had years ago. I didn't suspect anything was 'wrong' with it through the entire time of ownership and really wrestled about letting it go. It plays far better than my R9 for goodness sake! You bought the guitar several weeks later so I must assume that you thought it was worth the asking price anyway.

Can you share with the guys here why you feel the neck plate is false as I am now trying to like to like with other images online and cannot see why you would think that?

If you are going to return the guitar then that is the end of the matter as far as I am concerned. I apologise for your disappointment as we had very good comms throughout the sale and I kept you up to date with the packing and collection, tracking details etc. I did accept the return after questioning your claims at first (why wouldn't I? From my point of view it is a fine instrument) but after arranging the return you suddenly did an about turn and started accusing me of being a scammer trying to steal your money etc after I thought we had come to a resolution.
That is why I have asked for help on here.
I am just as disappointed as you are as I hoped you would enjoy the instrument immensely.

[dismalswamp]

https://photos.app.goo.gl/miUOeU6qF9E1cmhj2

[druckpig]

Good to hear both sides of the story. Let's both remain civil here as we try to assemble all the facts.

My following commentary will contain scenarios that should, in no way, be construed as accusations against either party, but merely I am trying to remain impartial in commenting on various things I am clearly seeing, based on evidence presented in both parties' photographs.

In light of druckpig revealing that the neck has a glossy poly finish, I realize I now do see the gloss on dismalswamp's photos, which is probably why the photo of the headstock face shows "two different tints" that I identified previously. The "two different tints" might actually be a reflection of something behind the camera, reflected only because of a shiny (gloss) finish. It would not be present if the headstock face were finished matte. The headstocks on both my So-Cals do not reflect anything.

I agree, the USA Production Model spec sheet lists a 12-16" compound radius. And because I have always believed the Japanese Pro-Mods had identical specs to the American ones that preceded, the Japanese guitars should technically also have the 12-16" radius. As a favor to both of you, I can measure the radius on both my American and Japanese So-Cal tonight and share the results here. I'll post photos of my radius gauges sitting on my 1st and 22nd frets to demonstrate the compound effect. druckpig, can you do the same if you have some gauges?

Can either of you gentlemen also share photos of the entire back of the neck? Every American and Japanese Pro-Mod I've seen, including my own, have very obvious parallel grain running down the length of the neck, and even showing on the back of the headstock. The photos both of you have shared so far don't really highlight this quartersawn grain. This may or may not help in identification, but please just oblige me, if nothing else for my own amusement.

One possibility is that the owner previous to dismalswamp had the guitar refretted, re-radiused, and sanded the original gunstock oil and logo off the entire neck, and then added a new logo and refinished the neck and headstock in gloss poly. Strange, but possible. That nut shelf does look awful though. Again, not an accusation against either party... just commenting on what I'm seeing as an impartial third party.

Another possibility is that the neck is fake, but honestly, why try to fake a Japanese Pro-Mod So-Cal? I can see why a counterfeiter might want to replicate an 80s San Dimas era Charvel, but not a mass-produced modern mid-priced guitar like a Japanese So-Cal.

There numerous websites/ chinese marketplaces online that produce Fake Copies of EVERY single type of guitar ever made including Fake copies of parts of every guitar any manufacturer has made.

A forum member called ginsambo also comments about dhdate an alibbaba selling fake necks in this jcf thread in the link here..

https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/120646-Why-are-there-so-many-new-Charvel-necks-and-bodies-for-sale-on-ebay

The Fake guitars typically sell for around $200 . They have in the past sold fake Charvels and fake charvel necks.... they will even make them to order for around $200 Take a look at dhgate.com and if you have not seen it before you would probably be shocked at how many different copies are on there.

Just to be clear ..
I did originally think the seller had possibly scammed me as I was first under the Impression he was saying he bought the guitar new from a dealer But I no longer think the seller Scammed me as I now understand he bought it used from a dealer so I think he was Scammed himself and then unwittingly passed the guitar on to me.

That does not change The fact the neck is Fake. NO Compound radius = Fake
It is well known that the producers of the fake chinese necks did not i.e. could not make them with the compound radius

I believe this will now be resolved amicably between the seller and myself and I genuinely I believe the seller is also a victim here as he was sold the guitar believing it was genuine and then sold it on to me thinking it was genuine.