I want but the $ ..... talk me out of it http://nosguitar.com/guitars/67flyingv/index.html
1967 Flying V
- Thread starter superV
- Start date
- Status
DavidRavenMoon
New member
Re: 1967 Flying V
That's a ridiculous amount of money. A newer V will be just as good. Unless you are just buying it to collect it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's a ridiculous amount of money. A newer V will be just as good. Unless you are just buying it to collect it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
L
Little Pigbacon
Guest
Re: 1967 Flying V
Holy Jim-Bob that's an awesome V. If you want it and can afford it, I'm not going to try to talk you out of it. If you went with a newer V for a fraction of the money, that would be awesome too.
Holy Jim-Bob that's an awesome V. If you want it and can afford it, I'm not going to try to talk you out of it. If you went with a newer V for a fraction of the money, that would be awesome too.
Gearjoneser
Gear Ho
Re: 1967 Flying V
Offer him $2500, and tell him it's a bummer he put an $11,000 chip on the headstock.
:chairfall
Offer him $2500, and tell him it's a bummer he put an $11,000 chip on the headstock.
:chairfall
Boogie Bill
New member
Re: 1967 Flying V
The Vibrola would be a deal-killer for me. I like guitars that stay in tune.
Bill
The Vibrola would be a deal-killer for me. I like guitars that stay in tune.
Bill
Re: 1967 Flying V
Is that thing even REAL???
Pickguard fit looks kinda questionable to me, possibly also the fretboard end and the headstock dimensions....and as to the Gibson logo --- thats on a plastic truss rod cover.
Fretboard itself, too, is a sad sad pale color...did fretboards that pale even pass muster before the 90's, on ANY guitar????
Is that thing even REAL???
Pickguard fit looks kinda questionable to me, possibly also the fretboard end and the headstock dimensions....and as to the Gibson logo --- thats on a plastic truss rod cover.
Fretboard itself, too, is a sad sad pale color...did fretboards that pale even pass muster before the 90's, on ANY guitar????
Last edited:
Re: 1967 Flying V
Im referring to how easy it is to fake up on a kit guitar.
And how the pickguard doesnt QUITE seem to fit/align perfectly with the bottom horn's bottom edge
Im referring to how easy it is to fake up on a kit guitar.
And how the pickguard doesnt QUITE seem to fit/align perfectly with the bottom horn's bottom edge
Last edited:
Re: 1967 Flying V
Ok hows this:
That neck is PLAINSAWN...not quartersawn, not rift sawn --- just a regular ole generic plank.
All others Ive seen seemed quarter or maybe rift
Between the vibrola (misdirects the eye) and the branding on a piece of plastic, this model's already begging to be counterfeited... add cheapo fretboard and plainsawn neck --- I see a relic'd kit guitar
Ok hows this:
That neck is PLAINSAWN...not quartersawn, not rift sawn --- just a regular ole generic plank.
All others Ive seen seemed quarter or maybe rift
Between the vibrola (misdirects the eye) and the branding on a piece of plastic, this model's already begging to be counterfeited... add cheapo fretboard and plainsawn neck --- I see a relic'd kit guitar
Last edited:
Re: 1967 Flying V
Just some more info....
Post #8....1957 junior with mainly flatsawn neck
http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?165057-Burst-Necks-Flatsawn-or-Quartersawn
And there are a whole range of neck cuts all through the vintage era.
Plus vintage era Gibsons are 'hand' sanded for final shaping. Thus no 2 are likely to be quite the same. Hence I (knowing about this era) would never use outer dimensions and how they relate to pickguards as a definitive tell.
This is all stuff that is needed to be known before crying wolf.
Just some more info....
Post #8....1957 junior with mainly flatsawn neck
http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?165057-Burst-Necks-Flatsawn-or-Quartersawn
And there are a whole range of neck cuts all through the vintage era.
Plus vintage era Gibsons are 'hand' sanded for final shaping. Thus no 2 are likely to be quite the same. Hence I (knowing about this era) would never use outer dimensions and how they relate to pickguards as a definitive tell.
This is all stuff that is needed to be known before crying wolf.
Re: 1967 Flying V
Back aint bookmatched, neck isnt quartersawn.... kinda goes against the recipe seen on other examples...
Add sad pale fretboard, smells like a cheap kit guitar already.
Also, theres no such thing as a "portion" of flatsawn board on a 1-piece neck design. Whole board that runs the length of it has ring patterns where you'd expect to see lines.
Back aint bookmatched, neck isnt quartersawn.... kinda goes against the recipe seen on other examples...
Add sad pale fretboard, smells like a cheap kit guitar already.
Also, theres no such thing as a "portion" of flatsawn board on a 1-piece neck design. Whole board that runs the length of it has ring patterns where you'd expect to see lines.
Re: 1967 Flying V
A junior was ALWAYS a budget guitar made of second-rate wood that didnt meet criteria for the grown-up models.
Seeing worse woods and mismatches there should come as no surprise.
A junior was ALWAYS a budget guitar made of second-rate wood that didnt meet criteria for the grown-up models.
Seeing worse woods and mismatches there should come as no surprise.
Re: 1967 Flying V
Searching for other examples to compare, I kept seeing straight grain necks and bookmatched horns
And not a single fretboard that light.
Example: http://1967-flyingv.weebly.com/sunburst.html
Anyway, MY point was to suggest extra wariness considering the price and how easily fakeable that guitar is...And then there's the missing pickup cover, replacement tuners, refret job --- eliminating detail after detail that you might look for in authenticating a guitar
Searching for other examples to compare, I kept seeing straight grain necks and bookmatched horns
And not a single fretboard that light.
Example: http://1967-flyingv.weebly.com/sunburst.html
Anyway, MY point was to suggest extra wariness considering the price and how easily fakeable that guitar is...And then there's the missing pickup cover, replacement tuners, refret job --- eliminating detail after detail that you might look for in authenticating a guitar
Last edited:
Re: 1967 Flying V
All guitars can be cloned.
If you'd actually said that, then that would have been fine. Instead of calling a guitar with no obvious signs of fakery into question without knowing the least bit about what you were talking about.
But for those who actually know the intimate details, the act of cloning it is actually quite hard. Burst experts can tell fakes that non experts would say was real.
Everyone buying vintage guitars should have them verified by people who now what they are looking at.
All guitars can be cloned.
If you'd actually said that, then that would have been fine. Instead of calling a guitar with no obvious signs of fakery into question without knowing the least bit about what you were talking about.
But for those who actually know the intimate details, the act of cloning it is actually quite hard. Burst experts can tell fakes that non experts would say was real.
Everyone buying vintage guitars should have them verified by people who now what they are looking at.
dystrust
Well-known member
Re: 1967 Flying V
+1
I doubt it's a fake, but what it is is too expensive. The ding on the headstock and the missing pickup covers should affect the price a bit. Also, didn't Gibson switch to plastic saddles on their ABR bridges in '65 or '66? I know transitions take time, but I suspect the saddles aren't original.
+1
I doubt it's a fake, but what it is is too expensive. The ding on the headstock and the missing pickup covers should affect the price a bit. Also, didn't Gibson switch to plastic saddles on their ABR bridges in '65 or '66? I know transitions take time, but I suspect the saddles aren't original.
- Status
