Help identifying Charvel neck and body (possibly Jackson?)

[Tracii Lee]

I just bought a "Charvel" guitar off of Craigslist and I'm trying to figure out what the pieces came off of. The neck is a 22 fret maple board R logo with nothing written on the heel. It has the full sized truss rod cover like a Model 1, but I think it is aftermarket because the cover isn't centered, the screws holding it on are HUGE, and it looks like the screw holes for the behind-the-nut locking nut are there. The neck is beat pretty bad, it's going to have to be refinished. If we can figure out which Model it is, I can order the correct body off eBay, because I'm pretty sure this body isn't the correct one.

The body itself is a real mystery to me. I've looked for two days now and can't seem to figure out what it is. I can find a lot of bodies that are very close but one detail or another will be off. It's a HSS configuration with a recessed cavity for a tremolo, but the bridge posts are in the top surface like a top mounted Floyd would be, and the recess is behind that. That's throwing off my search a lot on it's own. Next is the color. It is a very deep red, a really beautiful finish, and you can very clearly see the wood grain through it, but I can't find any other Jackson or Charvel body with the exact same paint job. I'm seeing similar red guitars but they'll either be bursts or have really complex top grain, none that are like the body I have. The body is flat, not an arch top, and the heel on the back is scalloped like most Jacksons, but the horns on the front are NOT scalloped. If I hold this body up to my 2001 Jackson SL1, they are almost identical, except this body has the volume and tone pots spaced farther apart, and the bottom horn is a little thinner than on the SL1. The neck pocket does have markings, I believe they say "JS-7 10-2" but the "J" could be something else because the red finish kind of bled into it. When I type that into Google I get results for 7 string guitars.

Everything in the pictures is what the guitar came with except for a First Act neck plate and 4 neck screws. Nothing written in the pickup cavities and only the ohm's of the pickups are written on them. The seller said he lost the tremolo so I don't know what was on it (he called it a Floyd Rose but that term can be ambiguous) I'd really like to know what the neck could've come off of and order another body for it, and whether or not those smaller screw holes would have been for the locking nut. I'd also like to order the correct neck for this body but I have no idea how to tell if it was a 22 or 24 fret guitar, what the scale length was, or anything. Any information at all would be awesome. Thanks!

Photobucket album:
http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/Tracii_Lee/library/

Assembled


Body (front)


Body (back)


Neck pocket


Tremolo cavity


Neck


Truss rod cover on


Truss rod cover off


Truss rod cavity

[Number Of The Priest]

The neck might actually be a Charvel Model 4M neck. Notice the placement for the screwholes for the "behind-the-nut" locknut. Specifically, look at the second photo in this Model 4M ad on Reverb to compare with your neck: https://reverb.com/item/4936488-charvel-model-4m-1987

You could buy any Strat-style Charvel body to mate with your neck. Model 1/2/3/4 would all be compatible. It doesn't have to be a Model 4 body, but don't let me stop you from getting one if your intention is to build a Model 4M.

The body has all the hallmarks of a 24-fret Jackson Dinky body (correct location of controls, correct body shape, correct electronics cavity shape, etc.) but I'm having trouble identifying what specific Dinky because the trem posts are not in the trem recess. That's the part that's throwing me off because I can't recall offhand which models had that combination. My search was a dead end.

Here's a long shot, but what pickups are those? If stickers/labels are under the baseplates, they might help to identify the model of the pickups which might help narrow down the era of the guitar. Seeing the one Jackson single coil suggests to me that the guitar is from the 90s, and that's where I focused my search because the 90s models are quite well documented but still turned up empty. The resources I browsed were:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190528...Jackson_models
https://web.archive.org/web/20180831...ofessional.php

Both the original versions of those sites are dying so the various links and photos may not work 100%, but at least the list of models is still intact and so I entered various model names into Google to remind myself what they looked like. And none of the ones listed had the trem posts separate from the route.

It got me thinking about two-point trems. A two-point trem like the Wilkinson unit has the trem posts separate from the route, which made me think the body might be from a Jackson PC3, but then Googling the Wilkinson route showed that it's not as large as a Floyd-style route, as seen below:



I can't think of other 2-point trems that Jackson uses. If anyone else thinks of any, please speak up. I looked at Henrik's Audiozone's Tremolo Info Project page (http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/TremoloInfoProject.htm) and came up empty.

Even if you kept this neck and body together (which I know is not your intention), I highly suspect the guitar won't intonate properly, because the neck is 22-fret and the body is almost certainly meant for a 24-fret neck. This incompatibility forces you to separate the neck and body from each other and create two separate guitars.

[rjohnstone]

The PC3 that came with the Wilkinson (1998/99), was a top mount... no routing under it.

The JS - 7 marking in the neck pocket is odd as no JS had this configuration with a top mounted Floyd.
The pickup routes look do not look like it came from a 24 fret guitar. The spacing is too even. On a 24 fret Jackson with H-S-S config, the middle pickup and the bridge pickup are closer together.
These are evenly spaced. So I'm pretty sure it came with a 22 fret neck. (JS 20 has identical spacing)

Put the neck on and take a measurement from bridge to nut. if it's 25.5" total distance and 12.25" to the 12th fret from both directions, the neck will work.

Definitely a Jackson body... wood grain looks like Mahogany or Cedro.

[Tracii Lee]

I think I figured it out. It looks like a early 90's Super Dinky. I found this one on Reverb: https://rvrb.io/1993-super-dinky-s-olrzkj

The guitar didn't come with a bridge unfortunately. I measured from the center of each bridge post and came up with around 2.9" which I guess is standard Floyd Rose spacing? I can take a bridge off one of my other guitars and try to install to see if it will fit, I have Original Floyd Rose's, Floyd Specials, and a couple different Schaller equipped guitars I can try. I would like to know which bridge it would have had originally though in case I want to order one, does anyone know?

Nothing written on the back of the pickups except the respective ohm ratings

I don't know anything about scale length, I tried to measure the distance between the nut and twelfth fret wire on the Charvel neck thinking it should be 12.25" but came up with 12" almost perfect, so I think I might be doing that wrong, but it seems like these Super Dinky's were Japan only and have a shorter scale length (24.75 instead of 25.5, does that sound right?) Those necks look pretty unique, I tried to find just the neck for sale but came up short. I see the Fusion necks are the same scale length though, would a 24 fret Fusion neck work? Would it just be a matter of ordering necks, installing them, then measuring the scale length until I found a neck that measured out correctly?

https://rvrb.io/1993-super-dinky-f-98kb7o

It's cool that I seem to have a pretty uncommon guitar body, makes for more of an adventure, haha

As for the neck, I am trying to price out getting a replacement locking nut, but I'm confused about the gaskets that go underneath them. What exactly do they do? They are a little pricey on eBay. I will probably watch eBay until a body I like comes up for sale, then just assemble the guitar as whatever Model body I get, so it could be any of the 4 depending on what's available

[Number Of The Priest]

Good job! Mystery solved! It's a Grover Jackson Super Dinky Standard (not to be confused with the normal world-market Jackson Super Dinky which is a Dinky with reduced body size/horns). How did you figure that out?

The Grover Jackson brand being a Japan-market brand, no wonder I couldn't find it in my research earlier. The Japanese market guitars are not quite as well-cataloged as the worldwide guitars and I'm still discovering cool models that they offered.

Here's a website with photos and the catalog scan with specifications: https://shamray.ru/product/jackson-g...hogany_japan#5

The specifications say the trem is an FLC-PRO. When you Google that trem, you get a Jackson JT580LP trem (made by Takeuchi). Maybe FLC-PRO is what the Japan market called the JT580LP. Looking at various search results for "Grover Jackson Super Dinky", I see they all come with the JT580LP which is funny considering the route has square corners which imply more normal-looking Floyds with square-cornered baseplates. The Takeuchi trems have angled-corner baseplates so a JT580LP looks funny as stock equipment on a body routed with square corners.

And it's a non-recessed Takeuchi too, with a pull-up recess. First time I've seen that happen.

So, if you want to rebuild a stock Grover Jackson Super Dinky Standard, you'll need the JT580LP. However, don't let me stop you from trying your other Floyds.

The specs do say the body is meant for a short-scale (24.75") 24-fret neck. Good luck finding one; you'll need a neck original to the body, or a Fusion neck. But, if your existing 22-fret Charvel neck correctly intonates, by all means it could be fine.

25.5" divided by 2 is actually 12.75". That's the number you should get when you measure the distance between where the string comes off the nut to the fret crown of the 12th fret. That's the number you could get when you measure that Charvel neck.

Finally, looking at the specs one more time, it says the body is mahogany, so rjohnstone was right. Color looks to be WR (wine red).

[toejam]

Looking at various search results for "Grover Jackson Super Dinky", I see they all come with the JT580LP which is funny considering the route has square corners which imply more normal-looking Floyds with square-cornered baseplates. The Takeuchi trems have angled-corner baseplates so a JT580LP looks funny as stock equipment on a body routed with square corners.

They did make the JT580LP with a square baseplate at one time; I had a 1994 Dinky Reverse with one. There was also the regular non lo-profile JT580.

[Number Of The Priest]

I had to check Henrik's Audiozone site to be sure (http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/TremoloInfoProject.htm) and you're right, I forgot there was a variant of the JT580LP that had square corners. I wish they kept doing that. To me, 90-degree angles look "cleaner" somehow.

[toejam]

I think it also looks cleaner squared off. From what I remember, a Jackson employee said they only did that on the JT580LP for one year.

[Tracii Lee]

Well, I feel dumb now. Not only did I do the math wrong, I was measuring to the 11th fret wire, not the 12th. Once I figured out my error, I was able to measure correctly and the Charvel definitely is not compatible. Not a big deal to me since I'm planning on doing a Model series build with it but for anyone else who might be wondering. I'm familiar with the Takeuchi bridge, I have an '89 Gunslinger that has a BC Rich branded one installed. I'll probably pick up a Jackson JT580LP since they're pretty affordable on eBay (one guy was even selling the squared off model when I looked earlier, I thought that was pretty cool)

I'll probably put the body back to stock as close as I can. There is a nice Jackson Fusion neck on eBay right now but the headstock is blue. That'd probably look alright but I don't know how I feel about it yet. I'm sure finding an original Grover Jackson neck to match the body will be next to impossible, and the Fusion necks don't seem to be very common either. Why is it such a big deal for places like Warmoth to make necks that will fit these kind of guitars? Does it have to do with the way the CNC machines run or something? Because a maple board with black offset dots and a reverse headstock would look killer on this body. Do you guys think a private builder could do something like that if I could get the measurements off of a Fusion neck? Another guy was selling a Musikraft Charvel Fusion replacement neck but their website made it sound like the 24.75 scale necks were for 25.5 bodies. This scale length thing is definitely adding to the challenge of completing the guitar. More adventure!

Also, I figured it out when I typed in "Jackson mahogany red" and just went through a ton of pictures zooming in on the bridge until I thought I saw a top mounted tremolo with a route behind it. Took awhile, but sure was a feeling of accomplishment!

[Number Of The Priest]

Man, you were really intrepid with that "Jackson mahogany red" search! Glad it paid off!

If it helps open up new options for a short-scale neck, I just remembered that there were also Charvel Fusions. The Charvel Fusion Deluxe had the choice of maple or rosewood fretboard, but standard dots. The Charvel Fusion Plus had offset dots, but always a rosewood fretboard. No Fusions (whether Jackson nor Charvel) had reverse headstocks. No Jackson Fusions had maple fretboards, but a few of them had offset dots. You'll have to compromise on the features you want, or best of luck trying to find someone to build you a neck.

List of Charvel imports: https://web.archive.org/web/20180831...rt-guitars.php (Scroll down to the Fusion section)

If only the GJ Super Dinky Standard body weren't meant for a short-scale neck, your options for necks wouldn't be so limited. Another option is to sell off the body to fund the purchase of a Model Series body and just focus on that build, unless you were really dying to build a short-scale guitar too, no matter the obstacles, difficulty, or cost.

How much did you pay for that Model 4M neck and GJ Super Dinky Standard body?

Side note: Instead of being a called a Grover Jackson Super Dinky Standard, they really should have called it a Grover Jackson Fusion of some sort. I realize Jackson and Charvel's model naming conventions have never been 100% internally consistent, but "Fusion" has always meant short-scale without a doubt. "Dinky" and "Super Dinky" always were in reference to body shape/size, never scale length.

Another side note: On the subject of model naming inconsistencies, the most recent example I know is the Jackson Adrian Smith San Dimas. In the Charvel world, the San Dimas is the rear-loaded Strat body with no pickguard. The So-Cal is the front-loaded Strat body with pickguard. If Jackson followed the Charvel convention, Adrian's guitar would also be called a So-Cal. To complicate things further, sometimes the model is called an Adrian Smith San Dimas DK. DK is Dinky, which Adrian's guitar isn't; it's a full sized Strat body!

[Tracii Lee]

I paid $200 for the Charvel/Grover as it's pictured and a Gio Ibanez that's actually in pretty good shape. Not a steal but I'm content with the deal

I like having kind of oddball guitars really. As frustrating a situation as this is, I'm trying to look at it as more of a challenge to complete as opposed to a crappy situation I'm stuck in. I don't want to sell the body for that reason. The Fusion necks are kind of few and far between (Jackson or Charvel) but that will be my first option. It'll probably be a weird color but that's okay. I did e-mail Musikraft to see if they can work with me on a custom neck but I will have to wait to hear back from them

I also toyed with the idea of getting one of those Chinese necks off eBay, just to get the guitar playable, and just keep checking for a Grover Jackson neck, or a Fusion neck with a black headstock that isn't terribly expensive. I'm not sure yet which way I want to go. They all have pro's and con's to them. In the meantime, I will probably get the body loaded with the missing pickup and bridge, I've been wanting to learn how to shield with copper shielding tape so this might be a good body to try it out on. I want to be a little more partial to the Charvel, and wait for just the right pieces to come up for sale, so both projects will probably be on going for some time. Luckily I don't have a deadline for it, if I count these as two separate guitars, they are #21 and #22 in my collection, so I'm definitely not running short on guitars to play, haha

[Dak]

Just keep a close watch on Ebay and don't forget about the Charvel Fusion unless the headstock just has to say Jackson on it. I picked up a Charvel Fusion neck with black background back in Feb. for $61 plus shipping. The point is broken off the headstock but in good shape and almost no fret wear otherwise. Most of the Charvel necks that pop up seem to have a black headstock instead of the body color. I personally have fell in love with the Fusions so that Super Dinky sounds like it will be killer when finished.

[Tracii Lee]

That's exactly what I was doing, but the only necks coming up for sale were colored instead of black. Then I found a Jackson Fusion Pro for cheap and bought that, so the Grover is on the back burner. I'm in talks right now for a Charvel Fusion neck with a sanded headstock, if I get it I'm gonna put a mahogany veneer on the headstock and stain it red to match the body. Then I have to decide whether to put a Charvel decal, a Jackson decal, or maybe my initials or something. I don't want to make a fraud guitar in case I ever sell it, but it is technically a Jackson... A bit of a moral dilemma. Once I have more pieces on the guitar I'll post an update