Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1. #1
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    1,310

    Default Opinions on JT580 and JT6 please!

    I recently acquired a Japanese made Charvel, as detailed in this thread:

    http://www.jcfonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53339

    The guitar came with what appears to be a Japanese market version of the Takeuchi JT580 (with Charvel logo).



    I have a spare JT6 lying around, and was thinking of swapping trems (for consistency... I have two other guitars with JT6's).

    However, if the JT580 is considered to be a higher quality trem than the JT6, I will not do the swap.

    Please post your opinions/reviews.

    Thanks in advance!

    -QR

  2. #2
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    halifax, nova scotia, canada
    Posts
    318

    Default

    I swapped out the JT-6 on the model 6 i sold to Delano, and I liked it WAYYYY better than the JT-6 that was on there. Stayed in tune better for me and looked a hell of a lot nicer too. I think it's probably hit and miss with those trems...

  3. #3
    JCF Member dg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    virginia, usa
    Posts
    6,138
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Judging by the length of the pull-up rout, it looks like the JT-6 would probably overhang. I'd stick with what's on there, and if it turns out that you don't like it, a Schaller or JT-590 may be the way to go as an upgrade.

  4. #4

    Default

    The trem doesn't quite match the route, so I bet the trem isn't original. There was probably a JT-590 in there originally. A Schaller Floyd should be a direct replacement.

    It's also unusual to see a model series logo on a dinky size body with the pull-up route, but stranger things have happened in Charvel land. I wouldn't be able to tell what it is though.
    Last edited by Sunbane; 04-19-2006 at 08:42 AM.

  5. #5
    JCF (I have no life)Member DonP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    12,062

    Default

    If it's the original trem (I'm on a fence Sunbane - it looks correct to me), don't fuck with it. You know the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
    Last edited by DonP; 04-19-2006 at 12:53 PM.

  6. #6

    Default

    This is where it looks off to me:



    I don't see why they would make a square route if they were going to put a Takeuchi with the slanted baseplate on it. But there could be a handful of viable explanations to that.

  7. #7
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    1,310

    Default

    Thanks for all the helpful responses, guys!!!

    I put my JT-6 on the guitar for a heartbeat tonight. The fine tuners didn't overhang the route, but the surface of the body interfered with the baseplate, so that I wasn't able to pull up as far as the route allowed.

    I swapped the trem back to the Takeuchi for now. Will consider replacing it with a Schaller at some point, as I've got one on another guitar and I like it

    Thanks again, you guys rock!

    -QR

  8. #8

    Default

    Looks like a 590 route.

  9. #9

    Default

    Yeah, a Schaller would probably fit like a glove. Go for it!

  10. #10
    JCF (I have no life)Member DonP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    12,062

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sunbane
    This is where it looks off to me:



    I don't see why they would make a square route if they were going to put a Takeuchi with the slanted baseplate on it. But there could be a handful of viable explanations to that.
    I see what you are saying now. Here's one explaination (of many I'm sure) - They "switched" to the Tak bridge but already had bodies routed for 590's, and since it was close enough, they just slapped them in. It seems to weird that it's a "Charvel" bridge in a Charvel guitar to make me think someone swapped it. Why would they go through the trouble to replace a good 590 with this?

    I only have one Tak bridge - a low pro model, but since I don't have an arm, it doesn't float. It's in a KE3 body (was a JT580LP). I never check to see if it didn't fit right - without a trem arm, it's not a big deal anyway - I'm just going to block it.

  11. #11
    JCF (I have no life)Member fett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    13,756

    Default

    I was just looking at my Japan Japan Charvel. It had a Takeuchi Floyd like your picture on it but the route is square. Maybe it was a standard route and the Floyd Licensed guys just made the backplate a little different I'll bet it was done so corners wouldn't hit the route on when Floyding.. Just my 2 Yen!!!!!!!
    Last edited by fett; 04-19-2006 at 01:58 PM.
    I am a true ass set to this board.

  12. #12

    Default

    Looks like a Tekauchi TRS-101, but, yeah, the route doesn't match it. Shame. I kinda like the TRS-101. Had one on my old Ibanez. Stayed in tune, rather well, for me. For my current project, I wanted one of these, but went with a Schaller copy, for availabilities sake.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DonP
    Why would they go through the trouble to replace a good 590 with this?
    I share your sentiments exactly, but you'd be amazed at what people will do to their guitars in order to save a few bucks.

    But yeah, I think it could very well be like you're suggesting - that they switched the trem type and hadn't yet had time to alter the trem routes. It wasn't long after the "pull-up route guitars" appeared that they went to fully recessed trems either anyway, so it's possible that this was a transitional piece.

  14. #14
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Between a rock and a hard place
    Posts
    3,749

    Default

    THe trem is original.... if youīll all look closer, thatīs not a Recessed floyd but a top-mounted one. The rout was standard issue on many guitars at the time, especially the Euro or Jap only ones.

    A JT-590 /Schaller rout would be fully recessed, including the space where the bridge posts are. The distance towards the back is also way more than a 590 would need... Thatīs how to tell the original JT-580 routs and the Schaller routs apart.

    Why the original 580 routs arenīt angled: No idea
    I would assume either
    a: to facilitate an upgrade to a better trem
    B: because the Takeuchi Templates possibly werenīt available
    or C: simple mistake that somehow became standard.

    A 590 would fit (but the 1/16" shorter mounting distance/ longer knife edge-saddle distance may cause intonation issues), and OFR likely would as Well... the Fine Tuners and baseplate on the JT-6 may cause clearance issues, and Iīd not really rate the JT-6 as a significant upgrade to a 580 either

    BTW, RX2K: the Original JT-580 is Identical to a TRS-101/ SFT-70 in all respects, just like the JT-580LP is identical to a Lo-Pro TRS
    Last edited by Zerberus; 04-20-2006 at 06:57 AM.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zerberus
    A JT-590 /Schaller rout would be fully recessed, including the space where the bridge posts are.
    Err...no. The Charvel 650XL came with a non-recessed JT-590 and a pull-up route (and so did the early 750XLs), so your argument is not accurate. Later 750XLs still had a non-recessed 590, but lacked the pull-up route.

  16. #16
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    1,310

    Default

    I got some 411 from jacksonguitar.org regarding the trem.

    In the 1990 Japanese Charvel catalog, the model of the trem is listed as: Takeuchi FLC-101

    Hope the above info will help the ongoing dispute

    In my opinion, Zerberus's option B

    Quote Originally Posted by Zerberus
    B: because the Takeuchi Templates possibly werenīt available
    seems most likely...

  17. #17

    Default

    Are the trem post spacings still the same between these and the Schallers? If so, Quantum, what would you want for that Tak?
    Last edited by Racerx2k; 04-20-2006 at 07:41 PM.

  18. #18
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    1,310

    Default

    Racerx2k-

    As far as I know, the Floyds/Schallers/Takeuchi's post spacings are all 74mm.

    By "what would you want for that Tak", are you asking me what I would replace the trem with?

  19. #19

    Default

    I meant: Is it for sale, and for how much. Or are you looking for something, in trade.

  20. #20
    JCF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    1,310

    Default

    Racerx2k-

    I'm going to keep the trem on there for now, at least until I come across a fantastic deal on a Schaller or an OFR.

    The other thing is, I currently live in Japan, and it would probably be a hassle to send you the trem and wait for you to get it (unless you also live in the land of the Rising Sun).

    -QR

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •