To part out or to restore? That is the question.

[fett]

This topic came up on the Sandasales Post. His question was; "Why part out a San Dimas (or any classic guitar) instead of restoring it. "Talk amoungst yourselves"

[Jim Shine]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

I have had a few vintage Fender guitars that were rough beyond repair, so I parted them out. However, those guitars were never logged and built individually. Charvels are a little different in that each serial number corresponds to a particular guitar.

[fett]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

I am new to the San Dimas guitars. Are you saying that each guitar was custom made by special order? My point is, that any classic guitar was made with parts that players covet now. There comes a time in any guitar's life when the parts are worth more than the whole. My question is when does that point happen?

[Newc]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Roughly 21 years, 8 months, 4 days, 12 hours, 6 minutes, and 17 seconds after it left the factory [img]graemlins/poke.gif[/img]

Or when someone says "hey, I had/wanted a certain guitar when I was a kid, and now that I'm an adult I'd pay $500 just to have a neck, then maybe $1200 for a body with a nice graphic, and I'd have to have the hardware from that time which is not made today" and they do.

Newc

[Grandturk]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

You have to remember one very important rule when you restore anything, be it cars, guitars or what have you - You will never (or very rarely) get back what you put into it.

That is why it is often more lucrative to part out a guitar rather than restore it. I'm not knowledgable on the San Dimas thing, but look at Fender Fotoflame strats. These things are a tough sell at $400, yet you routinely see the necks going for $250 and. You can make up the rest of the money from the body and hardware.

That said, I'm against parting out a guitar unless its relatively worthless to begin with. There are some guitars that just should not be broken up.

[fett]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

"I REST MY CASE (and also my ass)." I don't think anyone figured, at the time, that all of these guitars would reach a cult-like status. Regardless of the maker, guitars were guitars for 1000 people or the masses. The same thing happened to persimmon golf glubs in the early nineties. I sold a stripped down wood driver for $500.00. I just bought one the other day for $1.00. Be careful. Sometimes, the group of small buyers, somehow, just don't care anymore and just fade away. If you like it, play it and love it. If you want to make money, flip it anyway you can.

[fett]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Hey Newc!! Are you a car salesman. I depreciate your insight.

[Jim Shine]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Yes, each Charvel was made to order.

[fett]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

I don't mean to belabor the point, but you could probably count on both hands the guitars that are trully famous and worth the price (forget the froth). Remember, guitars are meant to be used and they get damaged; modified and just plain busted. For some reason, players have a gut notion that older is better. Sounds better; bragging rights; or whatever. To the true lover of stock vintage guitars, I salute you. For all the rest of you, I'll part the sucker out if it ain't stock.

[Newc]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Actually, that's nearly how long it took for SD Charvels to reach their current prices, and that's the exact "philosophy" many collectors (like Tracy, Slo100, Tim Rose, etc) have given concerning why they pay so much for them.

SD Charvel prices were still in the $300-$800 range in 2000 when I joined the old JCF, but shot up fast when more pieces and more buyers entered the market (read: Ebay); more buyers were willing to pay more money, so bidding wars ensued and the winning bids were considered the market value.

20+ years after they left the factory, they skyrocketed.

Newc

[fett]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Thanks Jim: Cars can be made to order as just about anything can if you got the bucks. But, after 20+ years and a ton of miles and untold many repairs, does that mean the car is worth more than the parts. Many times not. An under-the-bed 1965 K-Code Mustang Fastback is worth about 25K. A beater would be worth nowhere near that. The stock K-Code engine, alone, would be worth 5K on a beatup chassis. The beat-up K-Code chassis would be worth about 3K. The rest of the parts would be worth a lot. Just because a guitar is made to order doesn't mean I would be willing to pay top dollar unless it is dead stock and is what I want. I would part out a non-stock San Dimas in a heartbeat, if I could find one. I know, I have probably committed the "SIN", but that's the way it is.

[Newc]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

No one has a problem parting out a modded SD. Even if those mods were done by Charvel, if it was changed from the original work order specs, it loses a fair amount of value - even "improvements" such as adding a Floyd to a v-trem.

And you said "I", which indicates personal philosophy - that's pretty much what everyone goes by, but remember, there's a lot of "I"s out there who think similarly - enough to influence the prices for parts vs complete.

And I was under the impression that not all of the SD Charvels were made to order - as with any manufacturer, you have to have product samples with "basic" features, including graphics, hardware, and other options to show what your shop can do. I'm sure that after a certain time (popularity increase) they were only able to do orders, but there have also been many employee projects hit the street, which did not originate from an official order form.

Newc

[toejam]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

[img]graemlins/sleep.gif[/img]

[straycat]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Just finding a non stock San Dimas Charvel strat head is hard enough.You have to remember there were only 5491 serialized San Dimas Charvels made.And approx 750 pre pro(non serialized)and I feel it is safe to assume 90% were custom ordered.
Comparing fender strats to Charvels I have a BIG problem with that.There are millions of fender strats out there,plenty of vintage ones.
I can speak from experience I travel a lot in search of vintage guitars.You will find vintage Fender/Gibson etc every where but finding a USA Charvel is very rare.IMO some of the really old Fender strats are not really that great. (sorry)The quality control dept must have been sleeping on the job and let some slip through.
I have owned some real good ones over the years and some dogs too. [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

[pro-fusion]

Re: To part out or to restore? That is the question.

Part of the deal, I think, is that each old Charvel is unique to a much greater degree than you see in most other vintage guitars. They WERE made to order, even if it was an order placed by a music store seeking several instruments with basically the same specs but different paintjobs. But you so rarely see two that are exactly the same.

Whereas Fender and Gibson made standard production instruments--meaning every Strat or Les Paul from a given year is almost identical to every other one, except for finish, and even those are only from among a small range of production finishes. Far less interesting as a collectable, in my opinion, than a situation where every guitar is a unique 'personality', to be dramatic about it.

Having said that, I'm a player, rather than a collector. I understand the collector's impulse, but if I buy a guitar it's going to be played, whether it's a $200 Schecter Diamond Series or a 1959 Les Paul. No 'guitars under glass' in THIS household!

But, to the point, I find something really sad about parting out an SD Charvel, even if it is really beat up. There's something one of a kind about that guitar--its life story, I guess--that won't be recaptured by playing mix-and-match.