1980s SG ?? Have I been conned ?
#1
Posted 20 November 2013 - 10:00 AM
I did post this on the ID and info page but noticed more activity here and it is pretty urgent.
I bought a Gibson SG from a guy who said it was from 1980,and played on a special album recorded in 1980 but the serial number is 81506519 , I checked the numbers on the pots and they are 71-137 on 2 pots and the other 2 pots have 70-035 on them.
Can somebody please confirm my suspicions that this is actually from 1986 because I have very limited knowledge about guitars.
I attached photos on the other section of the forum and cant add any here ?? http://forum.gibson....bson-sg-dating/
If somebody can help I would be incredibly grateful.
Thanks !
Guitarchump.
#2
Posted 20 November 2013 - 10:04 AM
rct
#4
Posted 20 November 2013 - 10:43 AM
#5
Posted 20 November 2013 - 10:44 AM


#6
Posted 20 November 2013 - 10:55 AM
ksdaddy, on 20 November 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

THIS makes me "Crazy!" Yeah, there's some side beveling, again, but NONE,
in the inner area between the tip of the "horns" and the neck! And NO horn
tapering, at all!
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
It's exactly why I never looked at SG's, later than '69 on. The beveling
and tapering became less and less.

![[tongue]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_tongue.gif)

CB
#7
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:00 AM
#8
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:02 AM
Would you believe this is a 2 piece body? Whoever matched the pieces up deserves a free pizza on Friday.
#10
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:07 AM
GuitarChump, on 20 November 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:
Yes, it's an '86, made on the 150th day of 1986 and it was the 19th one stamped that day (not completed, just stamped). Made in Nashville (actually their ONLY plant at the time). Not Chinese. Look closer on the pots, you may find a different number than the 70-***. Look for one beginning with 137 or 304. It might be stamped around the rim of the can.
#11
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:11 AM
ksdaddy, on 20 November 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:
Ok thanks, I could definitely see no other numbers on the pots, the numbers I did see were very difficult to make out as they were faded. Just out of interest, what's a typical value for a 1986 SG ?
#12
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:14 AM
the beveling was still "conservative." and, horn tapering was still non-existent.
However, lots of people really don't care, one way or the other. So...whatever works,
for them. I'm a self-proclaimed "Nut" about such details...so, please...take that into
consideration.
![[biggrin]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_biggrin.gif)
I LOVE the beveling, and horn tapering on my SG's. But, ALL were purchased wihin
this past year's time. And, after not owning an SG, since 1968!
CB
#13
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:17 AM
If you held a gun to my head and asked me to make out a price tag for your guitar I would be thinking in the $700-800 range. You'd have to saw it in half for it to be worth LESS than that but if I were to spend more than that, I'd want a newer one with the "old school" revisions they eventually made.
My two cents and barely worth that much.
#14
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:20 AM
ksdaddy, on 20 November 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:
If you held a gun to my head and asked me to make out a price tag for your guitar I would be thinking in the $700-800 range. You'd have to saw it in half for it to be worth LESS than that but if I were to spend more than that, I'd want a newer one with the "old school" revisions they eventually made.
My two cents and barely worth that much.
Ok thanks for your help. Time to ask why I was not told the truth by the seller.
#16
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:28 AM
rct, on 20 November 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:
The inlays though, I guess it is the camera angle, or they are just that way, just a little more not straight than the usual not straight I guess.
rct
Well I appreciate your input, I'll take it to a guitar tech tomorrow for a close up check.
#17
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:33 AM
(The Fates lead the willing and drag those who are unwilling.)
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
#18
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:35 AM
charlie brown, on 20 November 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:
in the inner area between the tip of the "horns" and the neck! And NO horn
tapering, at all!
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
![[cursing]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_cursing.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/eusa_wall.gif)
It's exactly why I never looked at SG's, later than '69 on. The beveling
and tapering became less and less.

![[tongue]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_tongue.gif)

CB
Think they just wanted to make them less neck-heavy.
(The Fates lead the willing and drag those who are unwilling.)
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
#19
Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:56 AM
capmaster, on 20 November 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:
![[biggrin]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_biggrin.gif)
in the '60's, or currently, have ever been "neck heavy!" Am
I just "lucky," that way? I tried out several, of each of the
models I (now) own, in the store, and NONE of them, were "neck
heavy," either. So...???
![[rolleyes]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_rolleyes.gif)

CB
#20
Posted 20 November 2013 - 12:11 PM
charlie brown, on 20 November 2013 - 11:56 AM, said:
![[biggrin]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_biggrin.gif)
in the '60's, or currently, have ever been "neck heavy!" Am
I just "lucky," that way? I tried out several, of each of the
models I (now) own, in the store, and NONE of them, were "neck
heavy," either. So...???
![[rolleyes]](http://forum.gibson.com/public/style_emoticons/default/msp_rolleyes.gif)

CB
I think that "neck heavy" is left over from when a single Grover machine weighed as much as all six do today, and there actually were "neck heavy" guitars. I even had a tele that was "neck heavy", but it was because I put decent machines on it. And so then it got written in the 90's only once on the HCGF by a guy that never once in his life gigged or owned an SG and BAM!!!! has been repeated literally tens of thousands of times.
rct