Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was told by Jackson dealer RR1 has an Les Paul neck according to Randy'specs?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Was told by Jackson dealer RR1 has an Les Paul neck according to Randy'specs?

    As title says, a dealer is telling me the RR1's have a very chunky neck and not to typical Jackson feel. Or at some year/point they changed it to normal Jackson. Is any of this true and what year was it changed to a Normal jackson profile? Thanks

    According to this page, seems 1.1 mm and not a big deal. I have the same profile neck on my MII soloist. https://audiozone.dk/index-filer/JacksonRhoadsInfo.htm
    Last edited by DanzoStrife; 05-19-2021, 06:08 PM.

  • #2
    Rhoads of old (not RR1) definitely had a much thicker neck than the rest of the Jackson line.

    But, Jackson and Gibson have had so many different neck shapes over the years, I sometimes don't even know what a Gibson or Jackson neck really is.
    Last edited by pianoguyy; 05-19-2021, 07:21 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by pianoguyy View Post
      Rhoads of old (not RR1) definitely had a much thicker neck than the rest of the Jackson line.

      But, Jackson and Gibson have had so many different neck shapes over the years, I sometimes don't even know what a Gibson or Jackson neck really is.
      Truth. I don't think u can compare a 24mm classic Gibson neck to a modern style neck . I mean people were saying there was a massive difference between MII and MIJ yadadaya , but once I got one it was like really? This neck is amazing.

      But since he did stop me on this , i guess I had to ask. I asked another friend of mine, said he loves the RR1 so much, best Jackson ever and felt like his SL1

      Comment


      • #4
        For every catalog that has Neck thickness measurements, all say the RR1 is a standard profile. I mean this has to be correct then, as its repeated multiple times. The difference here is the Kelly and Dinky are a little thinner.

        Comment


        • #5
          Same profile as my Soloists. Hardly a big neck at all, just a C shape instead of the common D shape found on many Jacksons.

          When compared to the Speed Neck on my Dinky it's just a feel difference more than size.
          96xxxxx, 97xxxxx and 98xxxxx serials oftentimes don't indicate '96, '97 and '98.

          Comment


          • #6
            The RR run that was done for the JCF here in the early 2000s, the JCF-01, had a beefy neck like a Les Paul.

            I had a 2000 RR1T and 2004 RR1T that both had the standard Soloist-type necks.
            I feel my soul go cold... only the dead are smiling.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mudlark View Post
              Same profile as my Soloists. Hardly a big neck at all, just a C shape instead of the common D shape found on many Jacksons.

              When compared to the Speed Neck on my Dinky it's just a feel difference more than size.
              True, on a "speed' neck it feels wider but isn't (I've measure them) It's just because they are very slim as opposed to a soloist or V or any neck-through guitar.
              There are soloist with a thin D neck, just not as thin. I prefer a soloist over some dinkies, but that's just my personal preference.
              I know the old saying that the value of an opinion is generally inversely proportional to the strength with which it is held.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thanks for your input guys. Talked to him today, he was like "well I don't measure any of my guitar necks" But then we have certified measurements on Audiofanzine and then the catalogs.
                Then he concluded that C necks always feel chunky to him. I'm like ok. Apparently he hasn't seen the .952 LP necks and that's what I thought he meant. The .780 is pretty close to Jackson which might of what he meant. https://www.mylespaul.com/threads/le...-necks.245425/

                Anyways, still he was partially right but only with JCF-1 guitars, which are so rare? How many did this site make, like 5 of them?

                Q: Does the C neck shape u refer to feel like the Thin C schecters that are everywhere? Another friend of mine owns a bunch of LP's and 2 RR1 guitars. He said its the best neck he's ever played and the C is flatter than a regular C, maybe between a C and a D.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DanzoStrife View Post
                  Thanks for your input guys. Talked to him today, he was like "well I don't measure any of my guitar necks" But then we have certified measurements on Audiofanzine and then the catalogs.
                  Then he concluded that C necks always feel chunky to him. I'm like ok. Apparently he hasn't seen the .952 LP necks and that's what I thought he meant. The .780 is pretty close to Jackson which might of what he meant. https://www.mylespaul.com/threads/le...-necks.245425/

                  Anyways, still he was partially right but only with JCF-1 guitars, which are so rare? How many did this site make, like 5 of them?

                  Q: Does the C neck shape u refer to feel like the Thin C schecters that are everywhere? Another friend of mine owns a bunch of LP's and 2 RR1 guitars. He said its the best neck he's ever played and the C is flatter than a regular C, maybe between a C and a D.
                  I've only owned a Rhoads PRO, it was thin enough more of the thin D and the spec's should match usa spec's I had a usa king V but I'm not sure that's relative in spec's
                  I know the old saying that the value of an opinion is generally inversely proportional to the strength with which it is held.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by john.w.lawson View Post

                    I've only owned a Rhoads PRO, it was thin enough more of the thin D and the spec's should match usa spec's I had a usa king V but I'm not sure that's relative in spec's
                    Do u still got it? Man that's a nice guitar! btw Audiofanzine reported the RR1 and Rhoads pro have different thickness. For me thats not a big deal , but different spec. Surely not a .95 inch LP

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      https://www.jcfonline.com/forum/equi...rr-limited-run
                      I know the old saying that the value of an opinion is generally inversely proportional to the strength with which it is held.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DanzoStrife View Post

                        Do u still got it? Man that's a nice guitar! btw Audiofanzine reported the RR1 and Rhoads pro have different thickness. For me thats not a big deal , but different spec. Surely not a .95 inch LP

                        Did you see the guy that owns the Rhoads PRO and a RR1 saying they a basically the same?
                        I know the old saying that the value of an opinion is generally inversely proportional to the strength with which it is held.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by john.w.lawson View Post

                          Did you see the guy that owns the Rhoads PRO and a RR1 saying they a basically the same?
                          Nope, what guy is that? Maybe it depends on year. But surely whether its a 20.9mm or a 22.1 its still a Jackson neck is all I care about and should be A quality

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DanzoStrife View Post

                            Nope, what guy is that? Maybe it depends on year. But surely whether its a 20.9mm or a 22.1 its still a Jackson neck is all I care about and should be A quality
                            on the thread I gave you a link to
                            I know the old saying that the value of an opinion is generally inversely proportional to the strength with which it is held.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              i got to play rr009 years ago...i remember the neck was quite chunky...body felt tiny too...it had a repaired headstock (not very well at the time) and i heard they (famous bargain music) sold it to a collector who had the headstock repaired properly...but yeah it felt different from any post 87 rhoads i've ever personally picked up...d.m.
                              http://www.mp3unsigned.com/Devane.ASP

                              http://www.mp3unsigned.com/Torquestra.ASP

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X