I just looked at the new guitars. I wouldn't mind checking them out in a store. The Mustang looks really cool.

Dig the thinline Strat. Don't like the headstock.

Paris

_________________
1975 Sunburst Stratocaster rosewood finger board
1979 Stratocaster with roseowood finder board
2001 Candy Green Clapton Stratocaster
2007 Andy Summers Inspired Telecaster
2007 '51 P-Bass
2012 Taylor 110
2015 Mystic Ice Blue Deluxe Stratocaster Plus

Let's not be negative, guys. Let's do something positive about it instead.

I offer a Reverse-Relic'ing Service. It has been seen a few times on this Forum and shall be again quite soon (when TGS gets round to putting that knackered EJ bod in the post, being the soonest).

This service is offered at what I call: The Right Price. A price that's right for me, obviously. YMMV.

Cheers - C

PS. It's a joke - those of you with a decent and law abiding attitude to the Forum Rule Book. No commercial venture is going on here.

_________________

I'm not surprised to learn that some of the earlier model Fenders, now considered classics, had real problems.

Consider the Mustang (the car, not the guitar). It's a dirty little secret that, as super-cool as they looked, they were crappy, cheap cars, all sizzle and no steak. They didn't handle well, had cheap, plastic interiors, uncomfortable seats, poor brakes and steering, with horrible back seats, bad finishes...but OH! did they look cool!

Camaro? Same story. Only, IMHO, the first ones were fugly.

opinions...everyone has one...beauty is in the eye...etc...
The first Ford Mustangs were basically rebent Ford Falcons. But wow, that was some fine sheetmetal work!
1967, 1968, Camaros and Firebirds fugly, crappy, all sizzle and no steak? You'd be in a miniscule minority with that particular subjective opinion of fugly...& you'd better do a little more research on the steak for sure
The Squier '51 is still popular, and most assumed that Fender discontinued them to capitalize on that guitar's cheap sizzle in a more expensive Fender model, that wouldn't hurt sales of their standard Strats and Teles, which they undoubtedly did...Guitar Player gave that $179 guitar an editor's pick, for legitimate reasons! Why Fender is regarding this model as "new" as though it never existed is obviously some kind of corporate silliness.

I actually happen to like the Pawnshop fender 72 in a sunburst theme. It reminds me of a guitar that should have been featured in the film " Crazy Heart ".

Ceri I'm surprised you have not received that TGS body yet, I guess there is no rush after all..
Any way due to my problems with the Stratopartster II build, I decided to change a couple of items...Heh..Heh...

_________________
"C'est parti mon Kiki "

I'm aware lots of people love the original Camaro. I'm not one of them. That's why it's nothing more than In My Humble Opinion. The original Firebird, was, due to its grill, IMHO, much better looking.

These classic cars in the '60's were designed to be cheap, sporty cars that younger people would go for while their parents went for 4-door Buicks and "Your Father's Oldsmobile". There were basically 4: The Mustang/Cougar, Camaro/Firebird, Barracuda, and the Javelin. All were pretty cheaply made. They were different than the "muscle cars" pioneered by the Pontiac Tempest GTO, or just GTO.

All my point was is that what we remember from the past may well not be as wonderful or as well-made as we want to believe.

And, personally,I never liked the front grill look of the '67 Camaro, and I still don't. Others did, and all power to them.

We raced a 67 Camaro SS back in the early 70's. kept blowing 350's so switched to 327's.

I strongly disagree on the Firebird versus the camaro. Firebird's did not have hide away headlights and well....Most firebirds were left standing...

_________________
"C'est parti mon Kiki "

I'd agree if the discussion were limited to the stock grill. But the Rallye Sport Package with its hideaway headlamps really brought some class to the platform. Coupled with the Super Sport option, such a Camaro was a real head-turner.

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY

Thrain qoute:

haha that makes two of us! it will be mine, oh yes, it will

...man I would also like a camaro too...

_________________
Kid: "Hey Smokey! Where did you get your name?"
Smokey the Bear: "Well..."
(former user jimbo612)

I think the point's being missed.

Whether you like the original Camaro's look or not (I didn't), like the original Mustang's look or not (I did), etc. they still were ALL built as cheap, fairly junky cars because Ford had identified a particular market for people who wanted cheap, but cool-looking transportation. It really doesn't matter that my opinion on one of those entries is that it was fugly--that part is just personal taste. I also don't like raspberries or cherries. Lots of people do. All power to 'em.

So when someone pointed out that some of the early 60's designs by Fender (and, I presume the competition) have gained a valued patina due to nothing more than age, it seemed appropriate to point out that this is common beyond just luthiers.

You mean..you could..a gone with dis.... or you could..a gone wit dat...

_________________
"C'est parti mon Kiki "

I think the OP needs to buy himself a nice 50's or 60's Vintage Strat.....NON worn condition, and be done with it. That seems to be where this ends up. I think as long as FMIC keeps putting out Standard and Deluxe Strats and Teles, The rest of the line just livens things up for others that like variations. Now if Fender could get their Build Quality back in their amp line, (without having to spend three grand) they'd be getting somewhere.

I think the point's being missed.

Whether you like the original Camaro's look or not (I didn't), like the original Mustang's look or not (I did), etc. they still were ALL built as cheap, fairly junky cars because Ford had identified a particular market for people who wanted cheap, but cool-looking transportation. It really doesn't matter that my opinion on one of those entries is that it was fugly--that part is just personal taste. I also don't like raspberries or cherries. Lots of people do. All power to 'em.

So when someone pointed out that some of the early 60's designs by Fender (and, I presume the competition) have gained a valued patina due to nothing more than age, it seemed appropriate to point out that this is common beyond just luthiers.[/quote]

You mean..you could..a gone with dis.... or you could..a gone wit dat...

[/quote]


LOL!

While it DOES look better than those "mishapen eyes" on the orig Camaro, there's nothing like rollaway headlights when the cover doesn't QUITE align with the grilll.. Cougar had that problem too. Ruins the "cool" effect. And then when the mech breaks and only one closes......

Emphatic + 1

You know I'd like to weigh in on this.
I agree to the fact that yes, fender is trying to reinvent their own wheel. But come one. Its more than just eye candy or great sounding guitar its a buisness and there here to make money as well as guitars. Lets face it. put some wood with great accoustic and tone together place some pick ups in there with some hardware slap some srings on it and you have a guitar! Very simple design and not alot of room to improve without sacrificing some tone. so what better way to drive revenue with out changing the basic design. You come out it with particular product lines that apeal to different demographs. Thats all it is bro's
And then again you dont have to buy 'em if you dont like 'em.