JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

[GodWentPUNK]

My fingers are too fat and don't work well with the JT-6 trems. So, I've decided to replace them with OFR bridges. Are there specific model(s) I should be looking at. Will any OFR non-resessed bridge work? I've got two I need to replace.

joe...

thanks,

joe...

[dg]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

An OFR or Schaller with a 42 mm block should fit right in. This hasn't happened to me yet, but occasionally people run into a slight problem with the trem arm socket of the Floyd not quite clearing the route. I've heard of it happening on Jacksons & some Model Series Charvels. The socket is placed just slightly lower (wider from center) than that of a JT-6. If it rubs, you just have to widen the route a tiny bit so it clears. Only a big deal if it's a collector guitar.

[mm2002]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

What exactly is it about the JT6 that makes it inappropriate for fat fingered folks???? I'm not being sarcastic, this is a real question.
If you want to sell the two JT6's give me a shout.

[etaeniura]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

I have fat fingers too, and I actually like the JT-6. The Ibanez trem bars are a perfect fit and the fine tuners are great! I'm surprised Schaller hasn't used that idea to make the newer FLoyds low profile....who manufactured the JT-6's? Did Jackson make them on their own?

[MetalMedal II]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

[ QUOTE ]
Did Jackson make them on their own?

[/ QUOTE ]

They had them made in Tawain. I agree that the design of the JT-6 is really good with the fine tuners being out of the way underneath the trem, if only they were made with Schaller quality.

[GodWentPUNK]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

For some reason, I find it very difficult to move the fine tuners when located underneath. I can't grab one without tightly without hitting the others next to it. Plus, it always seems that I have to apply a little force (to grab the fine tuner) and when I do, it takes to bride out of level. I do prefer the top mounted screws and I don't experiece the same fustrations with those types.

mm2002: You do know that I'm a lefty player, right?

joe...

[peedenmark7]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

in a phone conversation w/ tim wilson , he said that taekiuchi company [not sure on the correct spelling] made them for jackson...
I like the jt-6 trems bridge design other than that they are a cheap sh!t cast material... I like the idea of the fine tuners at the back rather than on top..
though I have never had a problem with where they a relocated on a floyd...my only gripe was the "T" blocks for locking the strings on the bridge.
they kinda give me the feeling that my hand is being raised higher off the bridges surface.
the string spacing should be the same, is the fingers trouble just in using the fine tuners ?
john

[toejam]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

[ QUOTE ]
I like the jt-6 trems bridge design other than that they are a cheap sh!t cast material... I like the idea of the fine tuners at the back rather than on top..


[/ QUOTE ]
Same here. I heard that the string spacing was a tiny bit different than an OFR, but not really a big deal to notice.

[GodWentPUNK]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

Yep, my problems are with the fine tuners. But you know, it just could be me [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

joe...

[MetalMedal II]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, my problems are with the fine tuners.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I guess I could see how the fine tuners being difficult to access. With your 1st post, I thought you meant that the string spacing was too narrow. The JT-6 does have a narrower spacing compared to an OFR, but it's not by much.

[plon]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

Floyd spacing is 2 3/16. JT-6 is 2 in.

[xenophobe]

Re: JT-6 Replacement w/Floyd

No wonder I always liked the JT-6.