Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

1968 SG Jr....I think???


horax

Recommended Posts

Hey everybody.

 

Just engaged in a trade and I'd like some verification.

What I received in trade was what is supposed to be a 1968 Gibson SG Jr.

 

It's a little rough, but can be fixed up quite nicely. It was obviously re-painted

in black, and the headstock does NOT say Gibson on it.

 

The serial number is 520557, and it is located on the back of the headstock.

 

It has a single p90 (looks highly original). The pots and knobs were replaced for some reason

with cheap-o speedk knobs. It has the full size pickguard, rosewood fretboard, and has

the trapeze tailpiece and everything that came wtih it...loose in a box of course.

 

I will upload some pix so you can help me see if this is original or a copy.

post-56415-078961300 1393532945_thumb.jpeg

post-56415-020056000 1393532952_thumb.jpeg

post-56415-025009800 1393532969_thumb.jpeg

post-56415-007193600 1393532976_thumb.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey everybody.

 

Just engaged in a trade and I'd like some verification.

What I received in trade was what is supposed to be a 1968 Gibson SG Jr.

 

It's a little rough, but can be fixed up quite nicely. It was obviously re-painted

in black, and the headstock does NOT say Gibson on it.

 

The serial number is 520557, and it is located on the back of the headstock.

 

It has a single p90 (looks highly original). The pots and knobs were replaced for some reason

with cheap-o speedk knobs. It has the full size pickguard, rosewood fretboard, and has

the trapeze tailpiece and everything that came wtih it...loose in a box of course.

 

I will upload some pix so you can help me see if this is original or a copy.

 

Here's anotehr pix:

post-56415-039047400 1393533207_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reviewing the 68 SG jr the Gibson logo was a Silk Screen or decal so if they painted the headstock it would be painted over it appears that this is a salvage project the joint from Neck to body in your pictures looks off as well as the headstock looks OK but appears to be a tad slimmer in the middle then normal.. THE body pick guard and pickup as well as input jack are all in the proper position..From your serial Number it was made at the Kalamazoo Plant in 1965 or 1968 SO I would think it is real just really really rough and needs a great deal of work.. I hope you get her back into good shape and enjoy playing her

 

Hey everybody.

 

Just engaged in a trade and I'd like some verification.

What I received in trade was what is supposed to be a 1968 Gibson SG Jr.

 

It's a little rough, but can be fixed up quite nicely. It was obviously re-painted

in black, and the headstock does NOT say Gibson on it.

 

The serial number is 520557, and it is located on the back of the headstock.

 

It has a single p90 (looks highly original). The pots and knobs were replaced for some reason

with cheap-o speedk knobs. It has the full size pickguard, rosewood fretboard, and has

the trapeze tailpiece and everything that came wtih it...loose in a box of course.

 

I will upload some pix so you can help me see if this is original or a copy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's certainly within '66 to 72, by the long neck joint, alone!

Which seems to have started in '66. As everything else is possible

to "mod," it would be hard to say, though, what else is "original."

I'd say, at this point, you'll need to take it down to the wood,

have it refinished "Cherry," plug holes and reinstall Kluson tulip

tuners, and the batwing pickguard, and soapbar P-90, to get it back

to some order of "original" spec's, at least. But, of course, it

won't bring any real collectible value, since it's been to heavily

altered, already. But, it could/can still be a great guitar, from

a player's perspective.

 

Good Luck, on whatever you end up doing. [biggrin]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks guys.

 

I can't find any good pix online of the back of these guitars.

Does anybody have any that I can compare this one to?

 

Also, what were the standard colors of these SG Jr's?

I'm expecting some wood issues as the trem was removed and I can see

that there was probably a repair/fill job that wasn't done properly.

If that's the case, I can't finish in cherry and would want to do

something standard like white or whatever.

 

If black was around, I'd do it in black potentially. Either way, the

guitar needs to be re-painted.

 

As the value isn't worth as much as unmodded versions, would it really

affect value to put on a gibson decal? It would appear that if this was

a decal in the first place, a lot of Gibsons ended up without it over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advertised, and generally thought of, as more stable, with the longer neck joint.

In actuality, who knows? I've never had any stability, or strength problems, with

either. In my youth, I had 3 SG's (1 at a time)...a 62 Standard, 66 Custom, and '68

Standard (with the longer neck joint)! I didn't notice any difference, personally.

But, I didn't put my guitars through and "Peter Townsend" or like scenarios, that

would tax the neck joint.

 

You can "google"(image) '66-'72 Gibson SG neck joint, and you should see quite

a few examples. [biggrin]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number stamped on the pots dates to the 52nd week of 1965.

One of my reference books dates your guitar's serial number to 1966.

This, obviously, ties up very nicely. By the time the pots had been shipped-out to Gibson it would already be 1966.

 

As far as the instrument in question is concerned;

It could well be a regular 1966 SG Junior. It probably is.

 

One possibility - and I stress it is just a slight possibility - is that it's a Series 3 Melody Maker.

The problem with this thought is the peghead looks to be very slightly too wide - and curve-sided - to be a good match.

So it probably isn't a M-M......

For it to be a M-M the scratchplate and p'up must also have been changed at some point.

I'd like to see the body cavities. In an ideal world I'd also like to see the box of bits that accompanied the guitar.

 

Just for interest's sakes;

From 1965 the re-vamped M-M's shared the same body as the SG of the time but had that distinctive natural-finish neck and very slim neck-body join.

In the one photo I have of a '66 - '71 SG-J it appears to show the SG-J's neck joint to be sturdier than the ones shown here but bear in mind...I'm not an expert!

 

FWIW here is a (slightly modified) '65 Melody Maker which is currently for sale at George Gruhn's by way of offering a comparison;

 

65MM_zps1fb00875.jpg

 

Just a thought...

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your wish is my command:

 

cavity.jpeg

 

pickup.jpeg

 

tremspot.jpeg

 

neckspot.jpeg

 

goodies.jpg

 

 

spoke with the guy I got it from last night.

He said he painted over the headstock when he refinished the whole thing in black.

I don't knwo why he did that, cause he painted over the Gibson logo.

 

I uplaoded some photos showing the two blemishes that will need addressing. The rippling

in the paint by where the vibrola went, and a small blemish under the neck joint.

 

The box o' goodies shows the original lightning bolt bridge, as well as what he had on it, a

tune o matic type. The trapeze tailpiece he said was not original to the guitar either.

 

Also, he added the shielding paint to the pot cavity, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I spoke with Gibson again and discussed all the little things we've seen on here.

He said it is definitely a 1966 SG Junior.

I came standard with teh vibrola that I do NOT have.

Even though the body is routed for a single dog ear p90, he said that in 1966 (late in 66) they

started to install the soapbar p90 as seen in my photos.

 

The thought is that this is a 1965 body with a 1965 neck which

as he thinks, it was a build in 1966 using a 1965 created body and neck. The batwing pick guard was standard

in 1966, too, so this makes sense.

 

I guess I could go with the 1965 look to match the 1965 numbers on the pots and the neck.

OR I could keep it as a 1966 and the batwing as that is what originally came with it.

 

Oh, he also said the ONLY color these came in in 1966 was heritage cherry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for taking the trouble to do that, Horax.

 

OK...keep in mind I'm no expert where SG's are concerned but here are a few things to consider;

 

The rear edge of the scratchplate of a '66-period SG-J should have be unbroken continuous 'wave' curve like this '67 example;

67SG-Jfront_zps44b679c0.jpg

 

The '66 - '70 SG-J's were only available in Cherry as standard, White as a special order ('66-'68) or Walnut as a special order ('68-'70) and the rear of the neck would be painted like this;

67SG-Jneckheel_zpsde7e6106.jpg

 

I have no personal experience of stripping down a type-2 SG-J but here's one which is undergoing some drastic repairs.

You can see the shape of the original p'up cavity - with original paint - and it is straight-sided for a straight-sided P-90. Your guitar seems to have been routed for a 'dog-ear' version? Is that right??? Anyone out there with a P-90 Junior that can help?

67SG-Jpupcavity_zps6a67c651.jpg

 

The cutaway at the rear of the bridge might have been made to allow for some adjustment of the 'Badass' style bridge?

And the original P-90 might have been replaced with the dog-ear one?

But the lack of finish on the neck and the 'wrong' p'up cavity cast some doubt in my mind as to it being a SG-J.

 

Of course it could be that the entire guitar was stripped and the owner chose to refinish the body but leave the neck bare-wood?

I don't know.

Certainly the more I look at it the more the p'head looks like an SG-J than a M-M.

In any case the two guitars were all-but-identical except for the fixtures so if it is rebuilt with SG-J parts it will be an SG-J

 

Very Sorry I can't be more helpful, Horax!

 

That settles it; I'm sticking to the Les Paul section from now on......lol!

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for taking the trouble to do that, Horax.

 

OK...keep in mind I'm no expert where SG's are concerned but here are a few things to consider;

 

The rear edge of the scratchplate of a '66-period SG-J should have be unbroken continuous 'wave' curve like this '67 example;

67SG-Jfront_zps44b679c0.jpg

 

The '66 - '70 SG-J's were only available in Cherry as standard, White as a special order ('66-'68) or Walnut as a special order ('68-'70) and the rear of the neck would be painted like this;

67SG-Jneckheel_zpsde7e6106.jpg

 

I have no personal experience of stripping down a type-2 SG-J but here's one which is undergoing some drastic repairs.

You can see the shape of the original p'up cavity - with original paint - and it is straight-sided for a straight-sided P-90. Your guitar seems to have been routed for a 'dog-ear' version? Is that right???

67SG-Jpupcavity_zps6a67c651.jpg

 

The cutaway at the rear of the bridge might have been made to allow for some adjustment of the 'Badass' style bridge?

And the original P-90 might have been replaced with the dog-ear one?

But the lack of finish on the neck and the 'wrong' p'up cavity cast some doubt in my mind as to it being a SG-J.

 

Of course it could be that the entire guitar was stripped and the owner chose to refinish the body but leave the neck bare-wood?

I don't know.

 

Very Sorry I can't be more helpful, Horax!

 

P.

 

 

Curiouser and curiouser, as Alice put it.

 

Does the rout on mine look like it was for a dogear? The cutaway simply does NOT look like it was made to fit a soapbar

like the picture you just posted.

I'm wondering if it's a straight 65 and somebody swapped the pickguard?

But does my pickup look like a dog ear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I spoke with Gibson again and discussed all the little things we've seen on here.

He said it is definitely a 1966 SG Junior.

 

I guess I could go with the 1965 look to match the 1965 numbers on the pots and the neck.

OR I could keep it as a 1966 and the batwing as that is what originally came with it.

 

Oh, he also said the ONLY color these came in in 1966 was heritage cherry.

Hi again, Horax.

 

I was obviously typing my last post as you posted the response from Gibson so ignore all it said!....lol!

 

Glad you got it nailed.

As far as what to do with it?

FWIW if it were mine I'd return it to stock '66 specs as per the first snap in my last post but, obviously, it's up to you!

I would hope that the short Vibrola could be able to be sourced and a nice re-fin in dark cherry would make the thing an absolute stunner.

The gold 'Gibson' logo is readily available and a set of three-on-a-plate Kluson tuners would finish it off perfectly.

 

As mentioned earlier White was available to 'Special Order' between '66 and '68 but IMHO nothing could be better than Heritage Cherry.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi again, Horax.

 

I was obviously typing my last post as you posted the response from Gibson so ignore all it said!....lol!

 

Glad you got it nailed.

As far as what to do with it?

FWIW if it were mine I'd return it to stock '66 specs as per the first snap in my last post but, obviously, it's up to you!

I would hope that the short Vibrola could be able to be sourced and a nice re-fin in dark cherry would make the thing an absolute stunner.

The gold 'Gibson' logo is readily available and a set of three-on-a-plate Kluson tuners would finish it off perfectly.

 

As mentioned earlier White was available to 'Special Order' between '66 and '68 but IMHO nothing could be better than Heritage Cherry.

 

P.

 

If the wood is good enough, it will definitely be heritage cherry.

On my way now to a local guy who does this type of work.

 

I can do it myselft but think it would be best to have somebody else do it so

I don't muck it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just heard back from my luthier.

To get the guitar completely redone for paint, frets, etc., I'm only looking like 225-270 total!

 

I can afford that.

 

He said the neck does not need resetting at all, so that's good.

 

He will probably be able to bring out the original gibson logo under the black paint, too.

Now I have to start finding the tuners and knobs, etc. The toughest thign will be the vibrola.

 

Cool bonus: If the pickup doesn't work well, he will have Brad Paisley's tech wire us up some 65 p90's

that are period specific. He's a friend of Brads. :) Didn't know that.

 

So probably going Polaris White on this one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm already planning on it.

He's taking photos along the way, and when I go in to check the progress

I will definitley get some.

 

I'd LOVE a Pelham Blue color, but the only original colors were white and cherry red.

Am I wrong in thinking about a custom color like PB or the burgundy mist version or something?

 

He also suggested replcaing the pots and caps, etc. Says the pots are horrible condition.

Also, as the pickup is a dogear, I"m wondering if I shoudl use the smaller pickguard instead of hte

batwing and just show off the dogear as opposed to it looking like a soap bar?

 

He said that gibson made the soap bar and dog ear as the same pickup, with the only difference being

the pickup cover. Is that true?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Refinishing, regardless of reason, or how well it's done, WILL effect

"Collectibilty value!" But, beyond that...paint it what ever color

you want, I'd say. It might still be worth a bit more, in an "original

color," but it won't command the price it could have, if it was truly

the original, from the factory, paint.

 

I had to refinish my old '54 Gibson J-160E, as the original finish was

all but gone, down to the wood, when I got it. And, this was before all

the "vintage collectibilty" hysteria even started. So, I definitely took

a "hit" by refinishing it, in that sense. However, I've NEVER regretted

restoring it, as it looks SO MUCH BETTER, now! And, it was never intended

to be a "collectible" anyway. I PLAY it! [biggrin]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Refinishing, regardless of reason, or how well it's done, WILL effect

"Collectibilty value!" But, beyond that...paint it what ever color

you want, I'd say. It might still be worth a bit more, in an "original

color," but it won't command the price it could have, if it was truly

the original, from the factory, paint.

 

I had to refinish my old '54 Gibson J-160E, as the original finish was

all but gone, down to the wood, when I got it. And, this was before all

the "vintage collectibilty" hysteria even started. So, I definitely took

a "hit" by refinishing it, in that sense. However, I've NEVER regretted

restoring it, as it looks SO MUCH BETTER, now! And, it was never intended

to be a "collectible" anyway. I PLAY it! [biggrin]

 

CB

 

After a LOOOONG wait, the tremolo and other parts needed are finally available!

The build can continue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Ok, after a long wait, some little issues here and there...the guitar is finally nearly ready for painting.

 

Been a LONG many months, but I"m hoping patience will provide a wonderful guitar in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

UPDATE:

Still waiting on the custom paint to be delivered.

Howver, the body work is all done. WE pulled out the piece of pine or whatever they

had in the body adn replaced it with mahagony like it should be.

 

Everything is pre-drilled for the bigsby to go in once the painting is finished.

 

This is taking forever, but it will be done right (hopefully).

All we need is to paint the sucker and put the hardware on it.

 

the longest portion of time has been waiting for proper parts to be delivered, etc.

 

Here's the latest pic of the body:

 

newfront.jpg

 

In comparison, here is what it looked like after the paint was initially stripped:

 

front1.jpg

 

The neck has been fixed up at the joint, and the routing for the pickup was deepened a bit so you can get better action.

 

can't wait to get this finished!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...