Ordered a CR neck 10/16 and an OFR w/ R3 nut -- mistake?

[vikingred]

Hello all, new to the forum.  About a month ago I placed a custom order for a chambered strat body (black korina) and a bloodwood CBS-Modern 25-1/2" Scale neck with ziricote fretboard, and 1-11/16" nut width, R3 Floyd Prep w/ Mounting Holes.  Also got the 720 mod.  Chose rear route, and recessed FR route on the front, and I'm doing EMG 57/66's.  I have a question regarding the R3 nut I ordered.  God, I hope I didn't make a mistake!

So, the compound radius neck is 10" at the nut and 16" at the bridge as I understand it.  I chose the R3 option for the nut (with R3 Floyd Prep w/ Mounting Holes) because I read somewhere it's a little more narrow than the R4 nut, but that either will work on the 10/16 CR neck.  Is this true?  Or am I screwed?

Also, are the shelf and mounting screw dimensions the same for the R4 nut and the R3 nut, in other words, could I change to an R4 nut if I don't like the R3?  What prompted me to trip out here is I read somewhere that the R3 nut is 12" radius and the R4 nut is 10" radius. 

Hoping to get a super-low action on this and no buzz or fretting out.

Could someone please straighten me out on this.  Thanks in advance!  :sad:

Here is the body (satin finish, why not), check it out:

 

[pabloman]

The R3 has a slightly narrower string spacing and is a 12" radius nut. The R4 is a 10" radius.

 

[stratamania]

It is as Pabloman stated.

Here's the chart with all sizes available.

http://511e2271871424c2f15c-3b98a00d4daf07766c9421b476b3ba14.r8.cf2.rackcdn.com/FRNUTCONVERSIONCHART2013.pdf

If you want to change to an R4 they mount the same.

But you might want to consider getting some shims so that you can get the bridge to about an 18 " radius.

https://www.allparts.com/BP-2214-001-Bridge-Shim-Set_p_1061.html

 

[vikingred]

Thanks guys, yah, I'm aware of the shims issue.  Got those on order.  Just wondered how much of an issue it is to slap a R3 nut on a 10/16 CR neck.  Anyone else done this and/or would it be a big issue?  Or should I contact SPIKE and have him change my nut order to R4?  Ouch that sounded wrong.

 

[Cagey]

The R3 nut is going to put your outside strings slightly higher than the R4, although the difference may not be noticeable. Probably only be a couple/few thousandths. Depends on what you're used to and/or how well set up it is.

If it was me, I'd put the R4 on, because that's the right one and now's the time to do it. Shop doesn't care - the shelf cut is the same. Plus, nothing has been shipped yet. No reason to compromise. It's just a loose part. It's not installed or anything. 

 

[Jesse]

I believe that Schaller makes these nuts in different radii.  Their documentation shows the R3 as a 10" radius.

http://guitar-parts.biz/hp308369/Tremolo-Locking-Nut-right.htm

You may simply be able to track down one with the correct radius.

Same goes for the bridge. Pretty sure that OFR's with 16" radius are very common.

 

[pabloman]

OP ordered a R3 nut from Warmoth that lists the radius as 12". The R4 from Warmoth is 10".  The Schaller branded parts and specs just cloud the situation. OFR's only come shimmed to a 12" radius. With no shims it's a 10.  :dontknow:

 

[vikingred]

I contacted Warmoth about my concerns and this was their response:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R3 and R4 are both for 10” radius necks, the R3 just has a touch narrower string spacing.
The prep for the R3 and R4 (or really any Floyd nut for that matter) differ from nut to nut.
Swapping out even and R3 for R3 (or R4 for R4 for that matter) may require some modifications.

You are likely fine to stick with the R3 as I see no major issues moving forward.
Please advise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure I understand exactly what he's saying here, I apologize for my lack of knowledge, but does this sound right?  Keep in mind these are not the Schaller locking nuts, these are the OFR nuts, as specified on the Warmoth site:

The R4 specs http://www.warmoth.com/Floyd-Rose-Locking-Nut-R4-Black-P271C839.aspx say:

Standard string spacing.
10" string radius.

The R3 specs http://www.warmoth.com/Floyd-Rose-Locking-Nut-R3-Black-P274C839.aspx say"

Narrow string spacing. (Great for necks with binding; pulls the strings further in from the edge).
12" string radius.

Seems like the response from Warmoth is saying it would be a different shelf/cut for the R4 which I thought was the same mounting specs as the R3.

So I am thoroughly confused.  Just want to get it right.  Spending a small fortune on this build.

Any other thoughts, comments?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Cagey]

This is the Floyd Rose nut sizing chart. You should be able to make a decision based on that information:

 

[Jesse]

vikingred that's link you posted to the online shop definitely says it's made by Schaller and also definitely says 12" radius. That matches the chart Cagey provided, which is from the Floyd Rose site. They claim "German made" but don't specifically say Schaller is the manufacturer.

Here's a Schaller R3 nut on Allparts that says 10" radius. That matches the spec sheet I found. Not sure what's up but they may be OEM'ing parts for Floyd Rose with slightly different specs than their branded parts.

https://www.allparts.com/BP-2028-003-Schaller-R3-Black-Locking-Nut_p_1047.html

 

[pabloman]

Schaller makes both parts. Floyd Rose branded and Schaller branded. The parts appear to be made to different specs for the respected brands. :dontknow:

 

[vikingred]

Apparently, I am informed that the nut shelf is custom shaped to the actual nut you're receiving when you purchase a OFR tremolo.  Interesting.  Also, apparently, that has already been done for the R3 nut on my neck.  So as to not hold up production any further I have elected to let it ride with the R3 nut.  We shall see.

 

[stratamania]

You could if you wanted to spend a few extra dollars get the R4 nut in addition and give both of them a try and then pick the one that works best in terms of fit etc.

 

[Cagey]

Another choice is to avoid ruining a perfectly good neck with a Floyd locking nut mod and putting an LSR nut with locking tuners on instead. Works just as well, is more aesthetically pleasing, is easier to live with and requires one less tool. Mr. Rose came up with that locking nut because locking tuners didn't exist when he came up with his wildly complex bridge design.

 

[TonyFlyingSquirrel]

Another choice is to avoid ruining a perfectly good neck with a Floyd locking nut mod and putting an LSR nut with locking tuners on instead. Works just as well, is more aesthetically pleasing, is easier to live with and requires one less tool. Mr. Rose came up with that locking nut because locking tuners didn't exist when he came up with his wildly complex bridge design.

Yes, yes, yes.

You still get the strings resting on a steel nut, like the Floyd, so in a sense, open strings can sound more like fretted ones.  It's very, very, subjective, but for some corksniffers, it's just the right wiff.

I would love to see an LSR application for tilt back headstocks, someday!

 

[vikingred]

Another choice is to avoid ruining a perfectly good neck with a Floyd locking nut mod and putting an LSR nut with locking tuners on instead. Works just as well, is more aesthetically pleasing, is easier to live with and requires one less tool. Mr. Rose came up with that locking nut because locking tuners didn't exist when he came up with his wildly complex bridge design.

Interesting perspective.  That the nut shelf/mod "ruins" a neck.  You lost me on the LSR nut, never heard of it.  I love the wildly complex Floyd Rose.  It just feels right to me, like EMG pickups.  Got a link for an LSR nut?

Anyway, I decided to just leave the R3 on order.  Warmoth says my order should ship in 1-2 weeks.  Very excited.  I may grab an R4 nut and just use which ever one fits best.  It's only $40.  Unless..........you go titanium, and it's just a tad more.  :toothy10:

 

[Cagey]

Interesting perspective.  That the nut shelf/mod "ruins" a neck. 

Hehe! Well, sometimes I overstate my case when I feel strongly about something :laughing7:

Once you cut a neck for a Floyd Rose locking nut, you don't have any choice after the fact to change it. It's not necessarily "ruined", but it's utility and value is reduced. While it may not apply to you, some builders get addicted to the whole DIY/custom thing and move necks around from one instrument to another or sell them to others. One may not have a Floyd vibrato on the next fiddle, so the nut becomes a bigger pain in the shorts than one might want to tolerate. Since they're ultimately unnecessary and a major league pain in the ass in the first place, the neck loses usefulness and resale value. I mean, even if I had a body with a Floyd on it, I still would never buy a neck cut for his locking nut. And as a matter of fact, I'm in that situation now. I've got a body I'm forced to put a Floyd on, but I'll be damned if I'll buy a neck with a locking nut.

Why not?, you might reasonably ask. Bear with me for a moment.

Several tuning issues start at the headstock. First, non-locking tuners require that you have at least a couple/few wraps of string on the peg in order for the string to not slip and thereby lose tune. On a non-wang bar guitar, that's not usually much of a problem. Where the problem shows up is if you do have a vibrato bridge, the strings lose tension when you depress the bridge to flat them and may or may not take up the same tension when the bridge is released. Tada! Guitar's outa tune. Dammit!

Second, a poorly cut nut may itself grab the string and hold it at some (wrong) point and change its tension, which has the same effect. You lose tune.

Finally, poorly cut nuts demand string trees, another place where the string may hang up from time to time, also having the same effect.

So, what's a mother to do? Well, Mr. Rose's solution was to eliminate the entire headstock with a locking nut. And, honestly, it was a great idea and as much as I don't like that solution today, it works like a champ. Why he also went to the trouble to lock them at the bridge is a mystery for the ages. But, hey. You don't argue with success.

What can you do to get the same utility today? Well, you still need to lock the strings, but now we have locking tuners - a luxury Mr. Rose didn't have when he designed his bridge. We also have the ability to get well-cut nuts made from materials such as Graphtech's "TUSQ" or with alternative designs such as the LSR...

The LSR uses captured ball bearings to allow the string to move past the tension point with little or no resistance. In other words, no string hang-ups. Plus, good slots that preclude the need for string trees. Twice times birds killed, one stone.

Now we don't need a locking nut. And we never needed a locking bridge. We also don't need micro-tuners at the bridge, since we can use the headstock tuners to do our tuning. The reduction in mechanical complexity and setup costs a lot less. Then, for icing on the cake, we don't need to carry tools just to change a bloody string. What's not to love?

When you get right down to it, Floyd's greatest contribution to guitar vibrato was the two-point knife-edge fulcrum. This was due to its lack of friction, which is what made most previous designs non-repeatable. Damned things wouldn't return to neutral reliably, so they were always out of tune. The locking nut was a no-brainer, but is no longer necessary. Look at just about any modern vibrato, and you'll see his fulcrum design while none of them use locking nuts. No point to 'em.

 

[stratamania]

Now you know Cagey, has strong views on guitars and the component parts  :icon_smile:

But if I may add a couple of points.

Why lock the strings at the bridge, because that is also a place where the string can hang up and not return to a zero position after use. No mystery and it does make a difference. How much difference will depend on the design of the bridge in question. Its a pity I think that more bridges don't offer a locking option.

An LSR nut also has its drawbacks. It requires the nut slot to be modified to accommodate it so a retrofit with a different nut is less than straightforward. Its limited to 1 11/16" width necks and is only available in one colour.

The main thing is that the options are available and I don't think we should be precious one way or the other. Of course we all have preferences and that is as it should be but instruments are personal things and each to his own.

A man should be free to select his own nuts  ccasion14:

 

[Jesse]

I kind of chuckled when I saw the Floyd hate starting to come out.  I guess I sort of expected it since Floyd-equipped guitars are probably a small minority of the builds here.

Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.  When I grew up, having a Floyd and a locking nut was a sign of a "cool" guitar.  I've always felt that the locking nut looked very purposeful when paired with the bridge.  A Floyd with anything other than a locking nut would look odd to me.

Look at just about any modern vibrato, and you'll see his fulcrum design while none of them use locking nuts. No point to 'em.

Uhm?  Floyd Rose has stuck with the locking nut on all their newer designs as has Gotoh.

I would argue that for absolute tuning stability, there is no beating a properly set up double locking system.  Locking the string at both ends cuts out any string variables and you're only dealing with the trem springs to balance string tension.  A lot of these guitars can go months without unlocking the nut, since the tuning will stay well within the range of the fine tuners.

I'm by no means arguing that every or even most guitars should have a Floyd.  Just saying that it is an extremely functional system that is still extremely widely used for very good reasons.  One of the few examples I can think of of a modern design not using a locking nut is the trem that Music Man uses.  But every single guitar I can think of from ESP, Jackson, Ibanez, even Suhr that's using a Floyd-style trem is still using a locking nut.

 

[Vallhagen]

Locking nuts are cool!  :headbang: ...

Not that I have tried every available tremolo system, but I have played and owed Kahler, FR, Ibanez (FR lic.) and (latest) Wilkinson. Each carry their own feel, smooth/heaviness and tuning safety. To me, the only downside with the FR system is that it's a pita to intonate. Shouldn't the bridge string-lock add an ounce of sustain too?

... I have to checkout the LSR thing. It doesn't work for tilted headstock(?). Might be an option for my next-next build. If that will happen. Have to cut down the pine tree first.

and hey Vikingred! That body looks indeed promising!

Cheerio