Hi, new member, with questions about a USA Jackson I'm looking at

[Number Of The Priest]

Does the San Dimas plate mean much, or just indicate "custom shop"?

I believe San Dimas plates were still being used even after the move to Ontario: https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/27...n-1988-guitars

Priest, thanks again for your input. We were posting again at the same time, and I missed your comment about value. That does help, and for what the fellow is asking, I'll most likely pick it up.

Will update, and more pics to come if I get it.

You're welcome, and that's excellent news! Haha I now notice that our posts did overlap.

I forgot to mention a trem arm replacement. A Schaller tremolo arm shouldn't be difficult to find. https://www.fretsonthenet.com/Charve...%20-%20usa.htm is one source. The OEM part from Schaller is this one: https://schaller.info/en/replacement...umber=13080100

It just hit me; I would have imagined that a guitar of this era typically had a JT6 trem, not a JT590. But the route under the JT590 looks like it was factory, and the trem doesn't have the huge JT6 trem posts, indicating to me that the JT590 was factory and not aftermarket to replace a JT6.

[pianoguyy]

I like it too, and almost didn't even look at it when I heard purple.

Always look at the older USA models, regardless of color. It is not like today, where they have standardized colors. The older models could be any shade, and you never know when it may be trans, neon, glow in the dark, metallic, sparkly, or any other possibility you can think of.

Does the San Dimas plate mean much, or just indicate "custom shop"?

A San Dimas plate on an Ontario unit means - they hadn't yet ran out of the plates that said San Dimas.

I believe San Dimas plates were still being used even after the move to Ontario

San Dimas plates were used well into Ontario. Years, not months.

I would have imagined that a guitar of this era typically had a JT6 trem, not a JT590. But the route under the JT590 looks like it was factory, and the trem doesn't have the huge JT6 trem posts, indicating to me that the JT590 was factory and not aftermarket to replace a JT6.

The JT590 was used in the 80s. 1989 is the earliest I know of, but that does qualify as 80s. Some were even non-recessed.

[Highway Star]

Thanks so very much for the input, folks. This has all been a big help in helping me narrow down the age of the instrument, and what it consists of. I'm hoping to pick it up tonight.

Yes, when he said purple, I pictured pastel purple, like for a female's guitar, but it's a nice metallic shade, and the with the matching headstock and binding, I thought it looked pretty cool.

I may post the price after I get it, but I don't want to jinx it yet.

[Highway Star]

I purchased the purple Jackson. It is in bad need of a cleaning and fretboard polish, but I can't believe how great of shape it's in for an approx. 30 year old instrument.

The neck & fingerboard are amazing, and the frets look untouched. The maple has really darkened. I think I got lucky on this one. It found me through a business card I handed out.

It has old 9's on it, I gotta tweak it up for my 11's tonite. Will add pics soon. Thanks for the help.

I'm going to order the plate & trem arm ... I hope the socket is not boogered up. At first, I was thinking of a re-sell, but no way. I'm keeping this one.

LOVE those shark fins!

[xenophobe]

89 give or take a few months. Nice strat. I'd say it's worth $800-$1k depending on overall condition.

[Snaggleyoda]

My USA Jackson has the San Dimas plate see # 6764. I have actually looked in the neck pocket that ha a date of June 88. So we know that San Dimas plates were still being used on Ontario builds. Mine has the JT-6, which probably means yours is after 88.

[Mudlark]

Damn, that's certainly one of the more uniquely spec'd Strats for that era.

[Mossezhoffen]

Welcome on board! That's a one fine looking custom Dinky! In great shape too! I'd get that in a heart beat.

[Highway Star]

I got some shots of the purple Strat, and wanted to say thanks to everyone who helped me to identify it. The general consensus here and according to the Jackson serial number chart, seems to likely make it a 1989 Ontario guitar with a leftover San Dimas neck plate.

I stayed up most of the night masking off and hand polishing each fret, and scrubbing off 30 years of sticky dark grime. I polished out a few small rubs & stains on the body, and underneath is a new looking instrument.

It sure plays and sounds nice. The neck is different from any guitar I’ve owned (40 or so). I probably wouldn’t tell what I paid if I was re-selling it, but since I’m keeping it, what the heck, you Jackson lovers deserve to know … how did I do for $400?

I’m thinking of ordering the black / cream / black truss rod cover since the binding is pretty yellowed, or maybe a brushed black, to match the back plates. If anyone sees anything askew inside the cavities, please let me know.

I’d like to eventually remove the neck and see what info is underneath, but there are some small hairlines in the finish, and I don’t want to make them worse. The setup feels so good, I’m not gonna do anything else but play it.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[toejam]

Wow, nice score on that Strat! With that trem not being recessed and having the pull-up route behind it, that points to 1989, and I think that's the only year they did those routes.

[Number Of The Priest]

$400 and it's in amazing shape!

The rosewood has such a nice grain to it!

Hairline cracks in the neck pocket are pretty common in the Ibanez bolt-neck world, and shouldn't be a deterrent to removing the neck, but I seldom hear about it here in the Jackson/Charvel world (maybe because a good chunk of J/Cs aren't bolt-necks )

If anyone sees anything askew inside the cavities, please let me know.

Not specifically askew, but just more information for you. In the final photo you shared, you can see information partially hidden in the trem cavity, in the bare wood section behind the trem claw and trem springs. Did you note what's written there? That's likely the Work Order number. Info: https://www.jcfonline.com/threads/38...TAR-COLLECTORS

[4_string_guy]

That's a great lookin' guitar for an amazing price!! Very nice find

[Highway Star]

Thanks folks. @Priest, Interesting thread, thanks, and no I didn't pay much attention to the number, but it is 5714, and I can see part of the inked stamp, but nothing else is written. Under the missing truss rod cover is also penciled 5714, and FR initials.

So does the work order # tell us anything? Does the factory provide any info linked to the number? I'm guessing not, but it would be nice, the way Fender does now. I emailed them the SN for my Aerodyne Strat, and they sent me the full spec sheet for my guitar.

Something else I noticed after playing the guitar a little. It does have a wider neck & wider string spacing than my older Fenders, G&Ls, and Ibanez. Looks like 1 11/16" or possibly 1 3/4", where most of my vintage guitars are 1 5/8". That definitely messes with me, especially with thumb bass, but not the end of the world.

What about FB radius? Did Jackson have a commonly used radius at that time? I'm guessing compound, but I haven't tried to find my gauge to check it yet.

[kmanick]

well that's a unique one. Almost like a DK1 but with a strat sized body?
and a terrific score at that price.
I prefer 1 3/4 " width nut, I wish my soloists had them.

[toejam]

Something else I noticed after playing the guitar a little. It does have a wider neck & wider string spacing than my older Fenders, G&Ls, and Ibanez. Looks like 1 11/16" or possibly 1 3/4", where most of my vintage guitars are 1 5/8". That definitely messes with me, especially with thumb bass, but not the end of the world.

What about FB radius? Did Jackson have a commonly used radius at that time? I'm guessing compound, but I haven't tried to find my gauge to check it yet.

Most Jacksons are 1 11/16", but 1 3/4" could always be ordered. And I'm pretty sure all Jacksons have a compound radius board.