Jackson Floyd Question

[PowerTube]

http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/p...sku=511507#new

This is the guitar and the trem that I have. It is single locking and I think it's called a JT-500. I think they only made it for a short time. I want to replace it, but I want to be sure what to get. Does anyone know for sure?

Okay, now you've cleared things up. That model is exactly what I bought years ago and just traded: it was called a DX10X. Made in India, single-locking trem, and mine had Duncan Designed pickups.

Now to your question..... I briefly put an original Floyd on mine and, yes, the poles lined up perfectly (I switched them back because I couldn't stand having my old Kramer with that single-locker on it). However..... you might need to swap the sustain blocks between them. I seem to remember that the block on the original Floyd protruded just enough so that the trem cover plate wouldn't go back on. If you plan to leave the plate off, then no problem.

Hope this helps.

[Cynical1]

Thanks a lot. It intonated fine right with the OFR?

[PowerTube]

Thanks a lot. It intonated fine right with the OFR?

To be honest, I didn't leave it on there long enough to get around to setting intonation, but the string length looked to be just about exactly the same.

[rjohnstone]

This is a JT-500... looks just like a JT-590 minus the "MADE IN GERMANY" stamp.
Essentially the same trem but made from cheaper material.



Here is the newer chrome version. Note the logo is no longer present and it now has a collar type arm instead of the screw in kind like the older version, but it is still a double locking trem.



Whatever that hunk of crap is on that guitar, it is not a JT-500.

[Cynical1]

This one looks exactly like that chrome one. Even has that empty spot where the logo should be. It also has the same texture and the same collared arm. The only visible difference is that the strings go thru the 'string lock bolts'. So here's my final question. Which Trem is the best drop in for a REAL JT-500?

[rjohnstone]

Get a Schaller LFR.
It's a direct swap for a JT-500.

http://www.warmoth.com/Schaller-Floyd-Rose-Tremolo-Chrome-P578C694.aspx

An OFR WILL require routing for it to fit properly.

[Cynical1]

Thanks

[PowerTube]

An OFR WILL require routing for it to fit properly.

Mine didn't. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I had that exact same guitar, a DX10X. He also says that it's a single-locking trem, just like mine was.

Here's a (bad) picture of mine in that brief period when I had the original Floyd in it:



It just dropped right in, except of course, the sustain block was slightly too long for the cavity. Otherwise, it was perfect.

I'm not knocking the Schaller; I know that they actually make the "real" Floyd, but the OFR will indeed work for him.

[rjohnstone]

Never heard of a DX10X, but the more commonly found DX10D, which is what I assume the OP is talking about, is not routed for an OFR.
The string lock bolts on an OFR will run into the body.

This is a DX10D with a double locking JT-500.

[PowerTube]

Never heard of a DX10X, but the more commonly found DX10D, which is what I assume the OP is talking about, is not routed for an OFR.
The string lock bolts on an OFR will run into the body.

This is a DX10D with a double locking JT-500.

No, they aren't quite the same, but very similar. The DX10X had dot markers toward the top of the board, the DX10D had sharkies, as pictured. Guitar Center sold the DX10X for $349.00 at the time, while the DX10D was $399.99 (can't believe I remember all that).

The OP is talking about a DX10X with the single-locking trem (see his link). You left the ball ends on the strings and ran them through the little "barrels" in the bridge or whatever they're called.

[Jacksonguy666]

Can no one read? They have BOTH CLEARLY stated what they have, and still there are suggestions to what he MAY have!

[rjohnstone]

Can no one read? They have BOTH CLEARLY stated what they have, and still there are suggestions to what he MAY have!

Yes he did. I forgot he posted a link.

The DX10, as described in the MF link is not a DX10X as PowerTube likes to call it (the model name doesn't exist) and is not a DX10D that DOES come with a JT-500.
MF also calls the trem in this guitar a JT-500, but it is clearly not a JT-500.
This tells me the guitar was most likely an MF only run.
Looks like they grabbed some leftover PS-4 necks and some DX10D bodies and had some fun with parts.

[PowerTube]

The DX10, as described in the MF link is not a DX10X as PowerTube likes to call it (the model name doesn't exist) and is not a DX10D that DOES come with a JT-500.

Ahem.....

http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews/Guitar/product/Jackson/DX10X/10/1

[rjohnstone]

Ahem.....

http://reviews.harmony-central.com/r...son/DX10X/10/1

I saw that... not the first time HC has screwed up a model name.
HC is the only site to even call it that model.
MF listed it as a DX10... no X
Jackson has no listing in any catalog for a DX10X.

A search of MF site from 2001/2002 on webarchive shows no listing for a DX10X either. Just a DX10D and a DX10.

[toejam]

Jackson has no listing in any catalog for a DX10X.

Jackson never listed the '94 Dinky HX in a catalog either, but I own one. Just sayin'.