Official Luthiers Forum!

I'm replacing the bridge on this. The original is long gone. Somebody made this one, but it is only .200" thick, I believe to compensate for the need of a neck reset. It also appears to have a larger footprint than original. I'm looking for a completely fabricated replacement, or I will make one if I can find some dimensional specs. Does anybody have any information, I haven't had any luck.

Thanks,
Kirt

_________________
Horton, MI

Here's a closer shot of the problem bridge. And a picture I got off the internet of a normal one.

Pictures are mixed up. Bottom one is the problem bridge, as if you couldn't tell.

_________________
Horton, MI

I'd make a new one. I'd also look inside at the bridge plate and see if the strings are pulling through and bearing directly on the bridge, and inspect all the braces.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Thanks whisperer, Yes the bridge plate is shot. I'll be doing a neck reset and refret also. The pickguard has shrunk and is starting to cave in and crack the top. So I'll be removing and replacing that. The bracing looks to be attached everywhere. It looks like the guy went way oversized on the bridge to possibly cover up something he did to the top while removing the original bridge. There are a couple of gouges peeking out from under the bridge. I'll probably make a 5/16-3/8 thick bridge and set the neck to that. It would be nice to have a decent pattern to follow. I'll keep looking for a pattern or another instrument to copy. Here's another shot.

Kirt

_________________
Horton, MI

Problem is, now, that if you make a correct, smaller bridge, you'll be left with a BIG ugly ghost of this bridge. I'd make a new one of this size, but keep the "wings" very thin, to minimize weight and over-stiffness.

before you start to steam-off that neck, check to see if it's a one-piece neck, or laminated, and same for the neck block. If either one is laminated, I'd not take-on the job, or at least have the owner sign a waiver stating that I won't be held responsible if the neck and/or neck block de-laminates and the extra expenses(a lot!) that that will bring forth.

Does it really need a neck reset? These were built like tanks, after all...

If you're unsure, or practicing, I'd reset the neck first and THEN make the bridge, to match the neck angle exactly. If you end up making a bridge in between 5/16ths or 3/8th you're in the right ballpark as far as the angle is concerned. Definitely thin the wings!

If you pull the bridge off and the damage isn't too bad, you might consider refinishing the top and putting the correct size bridge on.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Thanks for the replies. All good points. The neck is 3 piece mahogany, very solid, but could have de-lamination issues though, thanks Grumpy. Yes, this is my first neck reset, but you have to start somewhere. I believe I have the skills. The bridge is less than .200" thick with no thinning at the wings. A straight edge on top of the frets almost touches the top at the bridge. So, no thinning of the bridge, it needs a reset.

The "repair" guy he took it to before really butchered it up. He didn't even bother to clean up the globs of glue that dripped on the inside of the back. The bridge plate is spruce, so I think he replaced that. I am considering replacing the top, that would get rid of most of the issues, wouldn't it. Use a standard Martin X-brace instead of the double-X. The sides and back are rock solid, but I've heard they are laminated even though the grain matches inside and out. Also, somebody told him it was Brazilian, but I think those were gone by the mid 60's. The laquer is very thick, typical Norlin era.

This guitar belongs to a friend and I know the repairs would normally cost probably $800 or more. So it's not worth it monetarily. I wouldn't give him more that $200 for it as it is. He is elderly, his wife has dementia, just lost his house and had to buy a much smaller place, etc. He has a sweet little Harmony H59 about 1962, that he bought new, but he says he doesn't play it. He likes the acoustics. I'm thinking about trading work for Harmony, I believe that is only worth about $500.

I'll be talking to him in the next day or so, see what he wants to do.

Thanks again, for your input guys.

_________________
Horton, MI

How low are the frets? if they're the "fat and low" ones, and have been dressed a few times, they're likely very low. If you re-fret with a decently tall fret, a straight edge will then clear the bridge by a good amount, and it will very likely NOT need a neck set.

Steaming a dovetailed, laminated neck will almost certainly see the neck de-laminate, and that can be a nightmare...

Also, with a bridge that large, you really don't want it to be 5/16" or taller, as it will weigh a ton! Keeping it low will be an advantage here. Also, do consider using lightweight EIR instead of ebony, again, because of its massive size.

Hi Grumpy,

My previous post might not have been clear enough. The straight edge just clears the top of the guitar at the bridge location, not the top of the bridge. So, I need to come up maybe 1/4" to get to the top of the bridge, assuming I use a "thin" bridge (say 1/4") like you suggested. That is a good idea though, going with a thinner and lighter bridge.

The frets aren't the low fat ones, and haven't seen much filing action. There is also a "ski jump" at the 14th fret and up. That area actually doesn't look too bad as far as aligning with the bridge. I don't think taller fret wire can help much. I don't have access to the guit right now, but I'll take another look when I get home tonight.

Thanks again.

_________________
Horton, MI

Yessir, I assumed that the straight edge cleared the bridge.

This puppy's in bad, bad shape!

FWIW, I think Gibson still uses that bridge shape for the Dove. You might be able to get a tracing at a friendly music store.

I'd rather see a shadow than that humungous disproportionate thing on there.