Question for you guys. I've owned my 5fx for years now, and one thing about it keeps bugging me. Prior to getting this one, back in the day, I had a Model 5A.
The Model 5A was a non-recessed trem with no pull-up route under the JT-6. Made sense to me because if you were going to recess the trem you'd obviously need to route for a pull-up, as well as change the neck angle. No need to do any of that stuff if you have it non-recessed.
Now I know that JC would not have paid to re-tool their production line (change neck angle and reroute for pull-up) to compensate for one guitar in their line-up when there were at least 4 (including the 5FX model) that were using the same body/neck. Especially when the guitars are neck-through (model6, model5, model 5a, model 5fx).
So can someone explain why the pull-up route? I know that the FX's were 5A's that got sent back to JC to make them what they are (added neck single coil), but it still doesn't explain the need to re-route it for a pull-up when the trem is already non-recessed.
I've been scratching my head over this one for a long time.
The Model 5A was a non-recessed trem with no pull-up route under the JT-6. Made sense to me because if you were going to recess the trem you'd obviously need to route for a pull-up, as well as change the neck angle. No need to do any of that stuff if you have it non-recessed.
Now I know that JC would not have paid to re-tool their production line (change neck angle and reroute for pull-up) to compensate for one guitar in their line-up when there were at least 4 (including the 5FX model) that were using the same body/neck. Especially when the guitars are neck-through (model6, model5, model 5a, model 5fx).
So can someone explain why the pull-up route? I know that the FX's were 5A's that got sent back to JC to make them what they are (added neck single coil), but it still doesn't explain the need to re-route it for a pull-up when the trem is already non-recessed.
I've been scratching my head over this one for a long time.
Comment