Les Paul from scratch - non warmoth
- Thread starter Danuda
- Start date
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
Progress is progress - don't pick on it because it wasn't in your plan. You're still further ahead than you were.
You're going to need to build a jig to route the truss rod channel, though. Don't even think of doing it any other way. It has to be predictable, repeatable, accurate and safe. You're getting to the point where mistakes mean scrapping a whole lotta work. Not that scrap is ever acceptable, but once you have a pile of labor into it, the value of the wood becomes secondary. You don't want to start over. I would suggest you come up with a design you can re-use, so the cost gets buried/amortized more easily by building more necks. That way, time and materials costs won't make you afraid to build something good.
I built some stools and guitar stands some years back using compound angles and wedged mortise and tenon joints that had me building jigs up the patootie. The damned jigs took more time than the projects themselves. But, it allowed me to have very good results and build multiple copies of the things because once the jig is built, you're all set. The next project takes no time at all.
It's all about having the right tools, even if you have to build them yourself. Anybody can draw up a design and power up a router, but not many people can see the future and set themselves up for success.
You're going to need to build a jig to route the truss rod channel, though. Don't even think of doing it any other way. It has to be predictable, repeatable, accurate and safe. You're getting to the point where mistakes mean scrapping a whole lotta work. Not that scrap is ever acceptable, but once you have a pile of labor into it, the value of the wood becomes secondary. You don't want to start over. I would suggest you come up with a design you can re-use, so the cost gets buried/amortized more easily by building more necks. That way, time and materials costs won't make you afraid to build something good.
I built some stools and guitar stands some years back using compound angles and wedged mortise and tenon joints that had me building jigs up the patootie. The damned jigs took more time than the projects themselves. But, it allowed me to have very good results and build multiple copies of the things because once the jig is built, you're all set. The next project takes no time at all.
It's all about having the right tools, even if you have to build them yourself. Anybody can draw up a design and power up a router, but not many people can see the future and set themselves up for success.
Cagey said:
Yeah, I am working on a jig design at the moment. I think I have something that will work. A router table would be the best option, but I don't have one and I don't want to spend the money to get one. I have lots of spare wood lying around so jigs are free. I do have an old table with a nice flat top that I don't use anymore. I have toyed with the idea of converting it to a routing table, but I am not sure if I will or not. It may be easier than building a jig. That is part of the planning I have to do. I like to have all my steps worked out well ahead of time. It drives my wife nuts.
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
A router table isn't a replacement for a jig, it's just another way of applying the tool to the work to improve accuracy and repeatability. Jigs are for special purposes, where you're making a cut that can't be made with any standard setup. For instance, if you wanted to install LSR nuts or the RS series of nuts for Floyds, you'd need a jig to cut the shelf on the fingerboard. No kind of table is going to help you with that one. Same goes for the neck channel rout for the truss rod. A router table isn't going to help you there; you need a jig designed just for doing that.
I think I am going to make a jig, but I was also thinking of the table because of a video from LMII.Cagey said:
www.lmii.com/CartTwo/thirdproducts.asp?CategoryName=Truss+Rods%2FNeck+Parts&NameProdHeader=Truss+Rod+-+Double+action+welded+nut
(click the play button on the right of the page.
It is kind of a jig thought since he uses a straight edge on the table. I think I am going to build my own jig though to simplify the set up. His way seems easier to mess up. Thanks for the advice though. It is nice having someone bring up possible flaws in a plan. Sometimes when you get deep into something you miss the thing right in front of your face.
I really want to make sure the truss rod route is fool proof. Like you said. It is more than the value of the wood at this point. I have a lot of time into the neck blanks and I am afraid of screwing them up. That is why I have been working on the bodies. The neck is definitely the trickiest part of the build by far. Once the truss rod is in I can breathe a sigh of relief though. Everything else is easily within my skill level. (Well except for doing fret work. That will be an interesting challenge.)
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
Actually, the way he's doing it is probably easier than what I would have suggested. But, it does require a router table. You may want to just bite the bullet and invest in one. They're good for a LOT of things, and make many things easier and less mistake-prone. They're not too dear for something serviceable. For instance, this Bosch unit...
...can be had for as low as $168 online. It doesn't have the height adjustment feature that the one the guy in the video was using, but... $168. And you can still adjust height, you'll just have to use the router's adjustment to do it, which isn't very convenient once it's mounted.
If you'd rather build your own, and you like the convenient bit changing and fine height adjustment you saw in the video, you need a router lift.
They're a bit more pricey (figure about $350 for a Bench Dog), but they work great and allow you to build whatever kind of table suits your fancy. If you have a good table saw, they also make extension wings you can install those on, which saves on shop space and allows you to use your saw's fence.
Then you can start into the wonderful world of buying router bits. As time goes on you'll find you have more money into those bitches than you will on the router and table both <grin>
...can be had for as low as $168 online. It doesn't have the height adjustment feature that the one the guy in the video was using, but... $168. And you can still adjust height, you'll just have to use the router's adjustment to do it, which isn't very convenient once it's mounted.
If you'd rather build your own, and you like the convenient bit changing and fine height adjustment you saw in the video, you need a router lift.
They're a bit more pricey (figure about $350 for a Bench Dog), but they work great and allow you to build whatever kind of table suits your fancy. If you have a good table saw, they also make extension wings you can install those on, which saves on shop space and allows you to use your saw's fence.
Then you can start into the wonderful world of buying router bits. As time goes on you'll find you have more money into those bitches than you will on the router and table both <grin>
Its so heavy...
Yesterday I worked on getting a truss rod channel routed out. In the end I didn’t use a jig or a router table. I clamped the neck to my workbench and attached a straight edge along side of it. I measured the distance on both ends so the router bit would run down the center of the neck. It worked great. The only mess up was operator error. I started to pull the router out of the groove before it had stopped spinning and nicked the channel. Ooops. You can see it in the left side of the picture.
I ran out of I can make loud noise time and had to stop at just doing one truss rod.
The next day I got to work on the angle of the headstock. My original idea was to attach a straight edge and rout it out. That didn’t work so well. It was difficult to get the clamp placement out of the way and the router kept slipping because of the limited space. In the end I gave up and did it the old fashioned way, with a hand plane.
It worked out really nice and I am happy with the results. I have been slacking on working on the third guitar neck. I am not sure why, but I really need to catch up on it. I don’t want to fall too far behind with one of the guitars or I worry that it might not get finished.
It was kind of a random day. Here I cut down the Paduak neck to closer to the finished size. I just used a circular saw and my eye.
The guitar bodies were feeling a bit chunky so I used my drill press and forstner bit to add some body cavities.
The problem is this thing is still a chunk. It weighs 11.5 lbs
I still have the carve top that will remove material as well as the control cavity, pickup routes and about ¼” off the back of the body, but I still worry about the weight of this thing. The padauk body is 7 lbs, but it is only 1 ¾” thick. The carved top will be 2 ¼ at the thickest point, which I thought was pretty standard.
Glue up. I wanted to do something that made me feel like I was making progress so I glued the rosewood top to the body that I drilled out earlier. Simple, easy and looks more impressive than the amount of work it took, Just what I was looking for!
Yesterday I worked on getting a truss rod channel routed out. In the end I didn’t use a jig or a router table. I clamped the neck to my workbench and attached a straight edge along side of it. I measured the distance on both ends so the router bit would run down the center of the neck. It worked great. The only mess up was operator error. I started to pull the router out of the groove before it had stopped spinning and nicked the channel. Ooops. You can see it in the left side of the picture.
I ran out of I can make loud noise time and had to stop at just doing one truss rod.
The next day I got to work on the angle of the headstock. My original idea was to attach a straight edge and rout it out. That didn’t work so well. It was difficult to get the clamp placement out of the way and the router kept slipping because of the limited space. In the end I gave up and did it the old fashioned way, with a hand plane.
It worked out really nice and I am happy with the results. I have been slacking on working on the third guitar neck. I am not sure why, but I really need to catch up on it. I don’t want to fall too far behind with one of the guitars or I worry that it might not get finished.
It was kind of a random day. Here I cut down the Paduak neck to closer to the finished size. I just used a circular saw and my eye.
The guitar bodies were feeling a bit chunky so I used my drill press and forstner bit to add some body cavities.
The problem is this thing is still a chunk. It weighs 11.5 lbs
I still have the carve top that will remove material as well as the control cavity, pickup routes and about ¼” off the back of the body, but I still worry about the weight of this thing. The padauk body is 7 lbs, but it is only 1 ¾” thick. The carved top will be 2 ¼ at the thickest point, which I thought was pretty standard.Glue up. I wanted to do something that made me feel like I was making progress so I glued the rosewood top to the body that I drilled out earlier. Simple, easy and looks more impressive than the amount of work it took, Just what I was looking for!
DangerousR6
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 15,478
Looks like some nice progress to me...This should be sweet... :icon_thumright:
bagman67
Epic Member
- Messages
- 9,106
Danuda said:Its so heavy...
Yesterday I worked on getting a truss rod channel routed out. In the end I didn’t use a jig or a router table. I clamped the neck to my workbench and attached a straight edge along side of it. I measured the distance on both ends so the router bit would run down the center of the neck. It worked great. The only mess up was operator error. I started to pull the router out of the groove before it had stopped spinning and nicked the channel. Ooops. You can see it in the left side of the picture.
Forgive me if my understanding is less than perfect, but isn't a truss rod groove usually supposed to be curved, rather than a completely level-bottomed slot? Hence the need for a jig. Of course some have had success with straight-bottomed truss rod channels, but check out this post on TGP (yes, that TGP) from Terry McInturff:
http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=404471&highlight=truss+rods
Obviously what youve done is completely reversible by gluing a piece of wood into what you just routed out, and starting over, should you decide to go curved bottom. But there are also other builder forums describing how to get what you're doing with the straight-bottomed channel.
Hope this helps -
Bagman
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
Wow. Maybe it was the angles of the shots or I wasn't paying close enough attention or didn't see the scale, but I didn't realize how much wood you're using for these things. You're going to end up with more more scrap than neck. You do realize the reason they use scarf joints on tilt-back heads is so they don't have to kill three trees to get one neck, right? Or, are you planning on getting more than one neck out of each glue-up? That would make more sense. Y'know, if you had that much wood to play with, you didn't have to do the tilt-back thing at all - you had plenty enough to do a straight headstock, and you might have gotten three necks out of each of those sandwiches.
On top of all that, you realize you're going to be pulling the headstock across the grain once it's strung up? I don't think I've ever seen a neck that does that. The wood is likely to tear along the grain doing that. That's why it's not done that way. But, since it's a glue-up, you might luck out. There's gotta be a lot of cross-grain action at the glue joints, so it'll be strong enough to hold. Still...
This is going to be interesting to watch.
On top of all that, you realize you're going to be pulling the headstock across the grain once it's strung up? I don't think I've ever seen a neck that does that. The wood is likely to tear along the grain doing that. That's why it's not done that way. But, since it's a glue-up, you might luck out. There's gotta be a lot of cross-grain action at the glue joints, so it'll be strong enough to hold. Still...
This is going to be interesting to watch.
Bagman67 said:Danuda said:Its so heavy...
Yesterday I worked on getting a truss rod channel routed out. In the end I didn’t use a jig or a router table. I clamped the neck to my workbench and attached a straight edge along side of it. I measured the distance on both ends so the router bit would run down the center of the neck. It worked great. The only mess up was operator error. I started to pull the router out of the groove before it had stopped spinning and nicked the channel. Ooops. You can see it in the left side of the picture.
Forgive me if my understanding is less than perfect, but isn't a truss rod groove usually supposed to be curved, rather than a completely level-bottomed slot? Hence the need for a jig. Of course some have had success with straight-bottomed truss rod channels, but check out this post on TGP (yes, that TGP) from Terry McInturff:
http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=404471&highlight=truss+rods
Obviously what youve done is completely reversible by gluing a piece of wood into what you just routed out, and starting over, should you decide to go curved bottom. But there are also other builder forums describing how to get what you're doing with the straight-bottomed channel.
Hope this helps -
Bagman
I used Stewmac's hot rod truss rods which require a straight truss rod channel. I actually picked them specifically because they are easy to install.
Cagey said:
The maple and walnut blanks would not fit more than one neck the way I am doing it. I want the neck visible through the top and bottom of the guitar on the neck thru so the blank had to be 2" fir the flat top and 2 1/2" for the carved tops. The rosewood stripe in the Padaul neck is only 4" so I did not think I could fit more than one for the carved top. I had to buy the wood in the sizes available and the Padauk came in 5" boards. A scarf joint would have been possible, but then I would gave had to add to the body side to make everything visible. After I did some cutting I realized I could have gotten two necks out of the Padauk laminate, but it was too late by that time.
The grain if the wood is a mistake. I did not take that into consideration when I purchased the wood.
I am an amatuer woodworker. I did a lot if research, but I that just did not occur to me. Hopefully the laminate holds everything together.As far as the straight headstock, I am not sure what you are saying. I am going for a Les Paul/PRS look and they don't have straight headstocks. Unless you mean something else that I am not getting.
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
Ok, I forgot these are going through the body. That does mean they have to be thick if you want to see the laminations from both sides. So, while there'll be some substantial waste, it's perhaps less than I thought it would be. Still, you need to plan on making some bookends or salt/pepper shakers or high-end bird condos out of what you'll have left over <grin>
As for "straight" headstocks, yeah, I was talking about the Fender style head as opposed to the Gibson/PRS tilt-back style. Uses a lot less wood and doesn't require the inherently weak scarf joint.
As for "straight" headstocks, yeah, I was talking about the Fender style head as opposed to the Gibson/PRS tilt-back style. Uses a lot less wood and doesn't require the inherently weak scarf joint.
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
ubershallman said:
It's stronger than a butt joint because you have a larger gluing surface, but there's no mechanical interlock so you're still relying on the strength of the glue and the integrity of the wood. The glue is generally stronger than the wood these days, but wood hasn't changed any. It'll tear along the grain next to the glue joint, rather than the joint itself separating. Because wood has a lot of shear strength perpendicular to the grain, but substantially less parallel to it, you don't often see straight necks busted at the headstock. But, look at the vast majority of broken necks with tilt-back headstocks and you'll most often see they're busted at the scarf joint where parallel stresses exist.
