Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jackson Strat Mystery! Am I getting jerked around?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jackson Strat Mystery! Am I getting jerked around?

    OK I snagged this off the bay a few weeks ago. It's a 1987 Jackson Strat with a Grover Jackson sig on the back. I assumed when I bought it that the OFR was an upgrade because of the stringlock. However, when it arrived...the OFR was an old one with a screw-in bar. Also, one of those open-ended wrenches that Jackson used to ship was in the case...which also sort of implies the possibility of a factory OFR. Yet, the stringlock. So, I have to crack her open. The work order number on the body is 2788. Yet, the work order number on the neck appears to be 2807, which is scratched out, and 2788 is written under it! :think:



    Very strange. We all know sometimes corners are cut, but would Jackson do this??? If it is a mutt, they managed to find a neck from another Jackson Strat from right around the same era. Would a fraudster be so beligerent and lazy as to attempt it in this way? Opinions on this?

    7
    It's legit. Jackson pulled dirty tricks like this all the time in the 80's.
    85.71%
    6
    It's bullshit. File a PayPal dispute.
    14.29%
    1
    Last edited by Axewielder; 01-09-2010, 10:46 PM.
    _________________________________________________
    "Artists should be free to spend their days mastering their craft so that working people can toil away in a more beautiful world."
    - Ken M

  • #2
    Just because the floyd was an older one doesn't mean that it wasn't swapped in in place of a JT6. And there seems to be lots of ambiguity with work order numbers so I personally wouldn't worry too much about that. I can't believe it was an 'investment' guitar, so just enjoy it
    Popular is not the same as good
    Rare is not the same as valuable
    Worth is what someone will pay, not what you want to get

    Comment


    • #3
      I thought Grover's sig was on the back of the headstock on those?
      -------------------------
      Blank yo!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by neilli View Post
        Just because the floyd was an older one doesn't mean that it wasn't swapped in in place of a JT6. And there seems to be lots of ambiguity with work order numbers so I personally wouldn't worry too much about that. I can't believe it was an 'investment' guitar, so just enjoy it
        I realize that about the OFR, I was just adding that to the circumstantial evidence heap. I guess what I am looking for are other examples of Jackson schenanigans when it comes to work order numbers. I do think there is a good chance this is legit, as the work order number is really just to facilitate the manufacturing process and is in no way a "serial number" per se.

        I also pinged the seller on this, so we'll see what he comes back with.
        _________________________________________________
        "Artists should be free to spend their days mastering their craft so that working people can toil away in a more beautiful world."
        - Ken M

        Comment


        • #5
          OK I added a poll.
          _________________________________________________
          "Artists should be free to spend their days mastering their craft so that working people can toil away in a more beautiful world."
          - Ken M

          Comment

          Working...
          X