What DON'T You Like About Les Pauls in General??

[chongo]

There is nothing I dislike.

 

As far as price is concerned' date=' I don't see this as a valid argument unless you are under the impression everything should be made available to you immediately without having to work and save for it (i.e, Obama-nomics / socialist or communist state mentality). The fact is, particularly for younger people, that the process of purchasing something of high quality is a good lesson in fiscal discipline, financial management, as well as understanding the value of a dollar. You can complain about prices all day and night, but they are what they are for a reason (quality) - people can choose to take it or leave it.

 

[/quote']

 

Goofy political statement and moralistic lesson blathering aside, you're missing the real question here.

 

IS the Les Paul high enough quality to justify the price (or do you simply assume that the higher priced object is the better one under all conditions)? I think that we're seeing a lot of evidence that it's not true, and certainly that the *perception* of sufficient value is missing in quite a few responses.

 

I, for one, have a pretty good stack of guitars and few issues regarding purchasing high quality items. In fact, I have a pretty good stack of Gibsons, including some expensive vintage pieces. Nothing dating past 1980, however. I don't consider that a cutoff date or anything -- I've just found little of interest until the Axcess, and I wouldn't be interested in an Axcess off the shelf; I'd probably have the custom shop gin something up.

 

The question is whether a $4000 Gibson Les Paul is worth $4K compared to what's available on today's market. I'm leaving "mojo" out of the equation, here, because it seems to me that mojo is what you put INTO the guitar, not what you get out of it.

 

If you were really interested in teaching a lesson in fiscal discipline, here, would you tell someone that a production $4K Gibson LP is truly a better guitar than a custom-shop Carvin CS-6 at half the price? Or better than a custom-shop Agile at a quarter of the price? Or better than a standard Agile at an eighth of the price? And let's not limit things to just the brands that you can find in a Guitar Center. Those represent only the manufacturers who build enough guitars to supply a huge chain. Are there much better values out there among the small or even boutique manufacturers? Why not spend that $4000 for a hand-made Moonstone Vulcan?:

 

 

 

If it were me, I'd probably suggest that they ascertain value first, and that they do that by ascertaining build quality and playability first (as objective indicators of value) and sound (a subjective indicator). And leave pricetag out of the equation until after they'd come to some judgements on the other three.

 

The whole point of the price discussion here is to find out whether Gibson LPs truly "are what they are for a reason (quality)".

 

Honestly, for the most part I have to say, "Not," as regards recent production. But that's my level of experience and my knowledge of what else is available speaking. YMMV.

[chongo]

 

For me' date=' the weight was also not an issue (my Strat is quite heavy), but the chambered body makes for incredible sustain! One of the main reasons I bought it. The sound is also very focused. I found many LPs that I tried to have a lot of extra stuff in the sound that made it kinda mushy. Otherwise, agree with all your points, except that the locking tuners on the new Standard are really nice, and with the new asymetrical neck, the feel is incredible!

[/quote']

 

Compared to a strat, even a chambered body LP will often have better sustain. There are other factors at work than simply weight. All else equal, a solid body LP will usually have better sustain than a chambered body guitar (and we're talking native guitar sustain, not amplifier/gain produced sustain). The move to a weight-relieved or chambered body guitar was done for weight considerations, not for sonic improvement. The "chambering" allows them to get the most unnecessary wood (weight) out of the guitar possible.

 

Gibson, with the LP series, is playing two different philosophies against the middle. They're pushing the connection with the traditional guitar heros of the past, but in doing so, they're well behind the curve in producing a modern guitar. The closest they've come is the Axcess, so far (with or without the Floyd). Kudos for the tummy cut, the thinner body, the much improved neck heel and the proper neck angle for a Floyd (for those who want one).

 

But if I were ordering one, I'd have to go to the Custom Shop with a special order to get one with a solid body, an ebony fretboard, MOP inlays, white binding, a really good AAAA top, locking tuners, a headstock that matches the maple top in both figuring and finish, a non-push-pull coil tap switch and a "normal" wiring configuration (as opposed to the linked volume knobs on a standard LP). And it would cost me the best part of a $6000 chunk (ask Wildwood) and a 5-7 month wait.

 

That's simply ludicrous when other companies (such as Carvin) will produce a custom built guitar like that for $2000 and have it in your hands in well under 2 months, complete with a 10-day no-questions-asked return policy if you don't like it. All USA-made and everything.

 

They COULD produce that guitar, and do so for well under $3K, but they diddle around putting tribal decals on the old white V design and cutting holes in Explorers to make something that looks like Mission Oak furniture instead.

 

When it comes to producing a guitar with some slightly more sophisticated electronics, they walk on their own genetalia with exaggerated fanfair (see the Dork Fire Fiasco).

 

Variax (line 6) did all that internal electronics guitar modeling better (though the actual guitar quality is a bit sucky) and cheaper beginning in 2004. They've even discontinued those models and are ramping up for version 2.0. By doing alternate tunings using pitch shifting algorithms, Variax doesn't screw with the tension of your strings, nor does it care about the gauge, and it gets a much wider range of tunings, all of which are instantly available upon a flick of the dial, with no strumming and waiting until the robot tuners catch up. They model different kinds of guitars with variable effectiveness (depending on who you talk to), but the whole thing is internal and can simply plug into the amp if you'd rather not use an external power supply. Back in 2004 they were allowing you to tweak those models (via their Workbench software on your computer) to your heart's content. Gibson will get that part of theirs worked out Real Soon Now. Maybe.

 

The goofy carbon fiber look decals they put over the pickup covers on the Dark Fire are reportedly already wearing off, but it reminds me of the folks who tart up their econo boxes with vinyl graphics and believe they've suddenly transformed them into sports cars.

 

Meanwhile, Carvin puts out a fairly wide range of fully MIDI capable guitars complete with all the controls necessary to control them (see the SH-575 and others), complete with gorgeous woods, all for far less than the cost of a Dork Fire.

 

Want to spend more money? Want lots more electronics options? Pick up the Parker Adrian Belew Fly Deluxe model. Ten grand. The whole Variax suite of electronics is built in. 25 different guitars modeled, pitch shifting, alternate tuning, the works. But wait, there's more. The Fernandes Sustainer is built in (did you know that Gibson produced a guitar with the Fernandes Sustainer in it -- they DID!) for infinite sustain (until the battery wears out) and more. Moreover, the guitar is completely MIDI capable. Fretboard is carbon/glass/epoxy, has stainless frets. Locking tuners, trem, even real magnetic pickups to go with it. Piezo. The guitar weighs just 4.2 pounds but will do infinite sustain?

 

That guitar is probably the epitome of current tech in electronics for guitars; the Dork Fire is five years back with what it's doing, but Gibson still doesn't have it sorted out yet. Modern guitar, my muscular butt.

[crossroadsnyc]

Hi Chongo,

 

Your point is well taken in so far that perceived value varies from person to person...which is what I meant by my point that people can take it or leave it. Really, it's up the each person individually, right? If you find the value there, then work and save for it - if not, look elsewhere.

 

From my standpoint, I find a tremendous amount of value in the $3,200 it cost me for my R8 - or for that matter, any price I've paid for LP's before my current one. For starters, the Gibson LP is the guitar that I started lusting after when I began playing...so I've always had a romantic feeling for them, if you will. Also, growing up most of my favorite players were on LP's, or had played them at some point...so there is the obvious emotional connection that some of us make with a particular instrument being connected to a hero. Silly? Yeah probably...but emotions have value... particularly in the arts/music.

 

Personal / emotional sentiments aside, I also have a guitar (my current one will be my last one) that will last me an entire lifetime (provided I'm not clumsy or have it stolen)...and it's a guitar that satisfies my objectives from a look, feel, tone perspective...meaning I'm satisfied with it on all levels. How do you put a value on a lifetime of happiness? I'd say that's enough value in itself (again, for me). Oh, and if I live until an average age...which would be my mid 70's, it averages out to about $80/year averaged over the lifetime...I think that's a pretty damn good value seeing as how it costs me more just to take the gf out to dinner. That doesn't even take into account the value of the guitar being passed onto a loved one once I pass...they make for a nice musical heirloom.

 

The third aspect, frankly (and we've had this discussion before), is that I personally find more value in spending more money on a guitar that is made here in the United States. As I've stated before, I'm an unapologetic nationalist and place value in supporting American workers over our friends overseas (when possible of course...ok, I did forget last time about some electronics that I can't really help haha). Yes, this is a political point of view, but it has personal value to me.

 

If you find more value in a half priced knockoff from Korea (your new Agile), then that's great...I just don't. I'm not knocking other guitars, or even the value of them...like I said, value is really an individual aspect in all of this. Though, I notice you spend a lot of time on here bashing Gibson while espousing the superiority of your foreign knockoff...I can't help but wonder whether this is done because you actually feel that way, or because you are tying to convince yourself of it. One could surmise that you in fact wanted a new Gibson but don't like the price and figured you'd try and achieve the same results on the cheap. Hey, if it works for you, great. If not, let me know how the resale value is of your new Korean knockoff is compared to the resale value of a USA made Gibson (I probably should have mentioned this in perceived value above, but I guess I kind of thought it goes w/out saying).

 

So basically what I'm saying is that value to me goes far beyond numbers on a price tag. Good thing we all have so many options so we can find what is of value to each of us.

 

For the record Chongo, I really do like the looks of your new Agile. It's really a very very pretty looking gal and I'm sure it plays/sound terrific. The heel on it looks like a dream to play. So don't take my above comments about it personally...they are not intended as a slam...it's just a personal opinion on perceived value.

[crossroadsnyc]

Why not spend that $4000 for a hand-made Moonstone Vulcan?:

 

 

 

I wouldn't play that guitar for free. I quite honestly loathe the looks of it. Though, I'm sure it's a very nice guitar...again, just gets down to the value for the individual.

[chongo]

From my standpoint' date=' I find a tremendous amount of value in the $3,200 it cost me for my R8 - or for that matter, any price I've paid for LP's before my current one. For starters, the Gibson LP is the guitar that I started lusting after when I began playing...so I've always had a romantic feeling for them, if you will. Also, growing up most of my favorite players were on LP's, or had played them at some point...so there is the obvious emotional connection that some of us make with a particular instrument being connected to a hero. Silly? Yeah probably...but emotions have value... particularly in the arts/music.

 

The third aspect, frankly (and we've had this discussion before), is that I personally find more value in spending more money on a guitar that is made here in the United States. As I've stated before, I'm an unapologetic nationalist and place value in supporting American workers over our friends overseas (when possible of course...ok, I did forget last time about some electronics that I can't really help haha). Yes, this is a political point of view, but it has personal value to me.

 

If you find more value in a half priced knockoff from Korea (your new Agile), then that's great...I just don't. I'm not knocking other guitars, or even the value of them...like I said, value is really an individual aspect in all of this. Though, I notice you spend a lot of time on here bashing Gibson while espousing the superiority of your foreign knockoff...I can't help but wonder whether this is done because you actually feel that way, or because you are tying to convince yourself of it. One could surmise that you in fact wanted a new Gibson but don't like the price and figured you'd try and achieve the same results on the cheap. Hey, if it works for you, great. If not, let me know how the resale value is of your new Korean knockoff is compared to the resale value of a USA made Gibson (I probably should have mentioned this in perceived value above, but I guess I kind of thought it goes w/out saying).

 

[/quote']

 

Make that a quarter priced knockoff (by the way, it's official nickname is "CK" for Cheap Knockoff), based on the price of any Gibson with a similar spec. I think I mentioned elsewhere that the original intention was to buy a Neal Schon Signature guitar ($6500 street originally, only 35 made for the public on a pilot program and those went like hotcakes and Gibson's official response to inquiries is that "We have no plans to make any more at any price.") They're simply not available used. So in fact you ARE correct that I wanted a new Gibson and I did decide to try to achieve the same results on the cheap, but not that the price was an issue. In fact, with the mods necessary to duplicate the electronics on the NS, the total price on the guitar will exceed $2200 anyway, so it's not going to be that cheap a knockoff <G>.

 

While I appreciate your dedication to US-made goods (though in a global economy such as ours, it's difficult to even know what's truly US-made any more), I should note that at least two of the guitar brands I've mentioned in some of these posts are US-made. Carvin imports a small line of foreign-made acoustic guitars, but all of its electric guitars and bases are made in San Diego. Virtually everything they make is done as if it were a Gibson Custom Shop custom order. I've got half a dozen of these, and they are consistently great player's guitars and extremely high quality. I've got three Moonstone guitars, built on a custom-order basis ONLY (see Moonstoneguitars.com) by Steve Helgeson in Eureka, CA. And I've got Gibsons; my first ever guitar was an ES-335 twelve-string ('67 ) that I still have. There's a pristine L5-S (looks like a Les Paul but isn't) from 1976 that's in the current rotation, along with a '50 ES-175. And more.

 

I recognize quality and acknowledge it where it exists, whether that's in a Cheap Knockoff like the Agile, a custom like those produced by Carvin and Moonstone, or in a good Gibson. But by the same token, I also recognize when companies are riding heavily on a reputation and when quality control has fallen behind in the quest to simply put out more product and make more money. I'm actually a Gibson fan, and if there seems to be bashing going on, perhaps my comments can be re-viewed as a result of the rankling that I experience when I see new guitars coming out of the box with splinters and dings in the fretboard, lifting pickguards (Hummingbird acoustic), poorly dressed frets, globs in the finish, badly sanded bodies, poorly chosen figured tops, fingerprints under the clear coat, and more. Those are objective problems, and no amount of perceived value or guitar hero lust can overcome those. You expect those on a Cheap Knockoff, but not on a guitar costing four times as much.

 

I rarely worry about resale value, though I remain aware of it. I rarely sell a guitar. I have some that the vintage market has generated silly pricetags on. Most have appreciated, with very few exceptions.

 

I'm tickled that you love your R8. The R8's and R9's are as good a traditional Les Paul production model as it gets, and are among my favorites. Were I going to get a burst replica in that price range, I'd get one of those. If I had unlimited money, I'd probably hunt down a good Peter Baranet ("Max") replica and get one of those. I tend to get bored and my attention drifts a bit when someone starts discussing the artificially "aged" models, but that's a personal taste issue. I've got *real* old guitars to pose with <G>.

 

But I think that Gibson can make a better Les Paul, and should. Others are already doing it. Why not them?

[chongo]

Why not spend that $4000 for a hand-made Moonstone Vulcan?:

 

 

I wouldn't play that guitar for free. I quite honestly loathe the looks of it. Though' date=' I'm sure it's a very nice guitar...again, just gets down to the value for the individual. [/quote']

 

Which is fine (I'm not famous on the abalone inlay or the back/neck wood - limba, I think - myself). Point is that there are alternatives for the money, and some of them include US-made hand built completely custom instruments that can be done with looks that you LOVE. Don't like quilt maple? How about flamed koa? Spalted maple? Chevroned Redwood?

Don't like the body style? Pick something else. and so on. Most folks don't even know that they don't have to accept what Guitar Center has on the wall at the prices that accompany them. If their tastes DID run to a guitar that looked like this, they could have it. But not at Guitar Center, and not from Gibson or Fender.

[crossroadsnyc]

Hey, I never said the Agile was cheap, man! I don't consider the price you paid for it cheap (unless it's a direct comparison to a Gibson), nor do I think the quality looks cheap. Honestly, I think it looks like a very nice guitar!

 

I've heard very good things about the Carvin guitars...and yes, I know they are made in the US. I just don't have that emotional draw to them...so I guess in reality a lot of the value I talk about is in fact based on emotional connection. I agree with you in respect to the QC w/Gibson, as it could definitely be better in too many cases. Though, one thing that I do find rather enjoyable about that is that out of 100 LP's, you'll probably find only 10 worth taking home...sometimes the hunt is fun to find "the one" for you!

[crossroadsnyc]

 

Which is fine (I'm not famous on the abalone inlay or the back/neck wood - limba' date=' I think - myself). Point is that there are alternatives for the money, and some of them include US-made hand built completely custom instruments that can be done with looks that you LOVE. Don't like quilt maple? How about flamed koa? Spalted maple? Chevroned Redwood?

Don't like the body style? Pick something else. and so on. Most folks don't even [i']know[/i] that they don't have to accept what Guitar Center has on the wall at the prices that accompany them. If their tastes DID run to a guitar that looked like this, they could have it. But not at Guitar Center, and not from Gibson or Fender.

 

Oh I totally agree...and I'd be very sad if my only choice were GC (not a fan).

 

So it sounds like you have some really nice guitars, Chongo...what amp(s) do you play them through?

[chongo]

 

Oh I totally agree...and I'd be very sad if my only choice were GC (not a fan).

 

So it sounds like you have some really nice guitars' date=' Chongo...what amp(s) do you play them through? [/quote']

 

The big stuff is in the storage space; there are a quartet of 4x12's that I haven't used in a while, a couple of 2x15 cabinets (old Altec 418-8B's) plus treble horns sitting in there as well, The Atlec A7's and other PA type gear are taking up a considerable amount of space in there as well. Several odd single-15 and single-12 cabs and one old Dual Showman cabinet from the late '60's.

 

Lessee what's in the den at the mo... I'm mostly using two Pod XT's -- one is mounted in an Atomic Research 112-18 (I've got two but one is waiting on an output transformer at the moment). These are closed-back single 12" (200W) cabinets with an 18 watt EL84 power amp built in. 50 watters are also available in this size and in a big 2x12 cabinet that's nearly 2/3rds the size of a 4x12. www.atomicamps.com

 

In addition to the Pods I've got a Mesa Triaxis and a Carvin Quad-X (nine 12 AX7 tubes in that sucker) as preamps. There's also a Hasserl modded (Stage II plus Attitude mod) Carvin Belair with two Vintage 30's, a Carvin XV112B from about 1989 (this is a 100 watt EL34 combo with a single 12" speaker, open back, that often powered a pair of 4x12's). It's got active controls, a 5-band equalizer. Very similar to the same year's Mesa combos, but it has a TON of volume. There are two EVJr heads, one box-stock, one with the Mercury Magnetics mod (both an EL84 and a 6V6 in that one), there's a 4x10 open back with something like Jensens (very pretty with the EVJrs, but will handle the bigger amps as well. There's also a Carvin TS-100 (100-watt EL34 rack power amp) that's actually 50W+50W stereo and can run EL34's on one side and, say, 6L6's on the other. There are two 2x12 closed back ported cabs loaded with Eminence Delta ProA's (400W per speaker capacity) and a pair of piezo tweeters each. Both cabinets are stereo, so you can run stereo into a single cabinet or you can run two separate amps altogether into each side of a single cabinet, or you can run one cab on each side of the drummer, etc. There's a rechargeable-battery Pignose Hog 20 and a Korg Pandora PX5D that replaced a PX3D. The Korg is a killer practice tool -- check out the specs on it -- and the whole thing will run on a set of AA batteries.

 

Don't have much in the way of acoustic guitars -- there's a Gretsch Synchromatic of unknown age (over 40 years), an inexpensive Yamaha dreadnought, and a Variax 700 acoustic, which is cheating because it has no acoustic properties at all, except that it looks like an acoustic guitar and mimics one for recording purposes. There's a 1939 Epiphone Emperor in storage (no pickups -- just a big old big-band chord thumper) that was refinished back in about 1968 in a French Polish. That's about it for that stuff.

[marius]

small strapbuttons,chambering

[LT ED]

I got to say I love them warts and all.

[ysottot]

Price and jack location.

Need to be careful when sitting on the couch using a VOX headphone amp (which by the way are great)

all though I could use a small right angle pigtail.

[Old Deadhead]

Price and weight are the only 2 things I'm not crazy about. QC is no better or worse than most others. If Gibson used better quality hardware eg. pots, caps, tuners, nuts, the price would be even more astronomical.

[gighand]

To me, having a Les Paul is kind of like having a Corvette. No matter what year you have there is always an interest and certain good and bad points. And unless you have to, you will never want to get rid of it.

 

I have a '92 Standard which I played out for a few years. That ended when I had (left) shoulder surgery. Coincidence? Don't know. I rarely take it out of the case but still love it. I do wonder where a kid is supposed to come up with $2,400 though.

[KSG_Standard]

... I do wonder where a kid is supposed to come up with $2' date='400 though.[/quote']

 

Same way that kids/young adults have always come up with the money to buy one...they've always been expensive. Check this out...

 

http://www.measuringworth.com/ppowerus/

[LPguitarman]

small strapbuttons' date='chambering[/quote']

 

Not all Les Pauls are chambered. Get one without chambering if you don't like it. Personnally, I like the chambering. JMHO.

[chongo]

Price and weight are the only 2 things I'm not crazy about. QC is no better or worse than most others. If Gibson used better quality hardware eg. pots' date=' caps, tuners, nuts, the price would be even more astronomical.[/quote']

 

<G> Likely. But that stuff isn't really all that expensive. It's one thing to expect to have to mod a cheap guitar in this regard. Quite another to deal with it on a pricey one.

 

I can understand going with whatever came on a vintage guitar if you're trying to reproduce an accurate clone, but this is rather like putting a Flathead in a Ferrari.

[chongo]

 

Not all Les Pauls are chambered. Get one without chambering if you don't like it. Personnally' date=' I like the chambering. JMHO.[/quote']

 

Aren't most of them now chambered/weight relieved/cored with Balsa or something? I prefer the solid bodies, personally...

[stratele]

I love my Lester, and doubt I will ever own a better guitar. However, I would move the PU switch down by the volume/ tone controlls.

+1, I keep hitting that switch when I'm strumming too hard. And I would also like to have a contoured body and a Strat like jack input, to stop that lead digging into my leg/sofa when I'm sitting. But then, it wouldn't be a Les Paul would it? It would look odd...

[snaredrum]

the 17th fret thing is the only part i hate. i'm arthritic and put up with the weight cos they sound SOOOOO good...

[pippy]

1960-style 'Jumbo' frets a little too high after all my years of Strat ownership. Fretwise I preferred the '58 re-issue types I tested but I couldn't live with the neck thickness.

 

Other than that I can't think of a single flaw in the design of the 'Les Paul'. Fret access isn't much of an issue to me; I like the benefits associated with the weight of the solidbody - it also makes the guitar sit at the perfect angle balance wise; I've never had a problem with the original-fitment strap buttons; neck-heel is fine (although the '60 is, admittedly, marginally smaller than either a '58 or a '59); neck-angle is better (IMO) than a Strat; I don't expect I'll allow my instrument to be left such that it will fall - resulting in a peghead breakage; selector switch position is perfect for me; ditto tone/vol knobs; I wear my LP much higher than I wore my Strat and the lack of a dressed body isn't an issue;

 

For those who have described in fine detail where Gibson could improve the LP I'd like to suggest that the resulting instrument would not be the Les Paul - it might be a lot better for a lot of people - but it wouldn't be the Les Paul.

 

I'd also like to ask those same people why on Earth they bought a Les Paul in the first place? There exist many examples of instruments built along the lines mentioned. Why not just buy one of those instead? Why buy a 'Gibson Les Paul' at all if you don't like much of what makes it a 'Gibson Les Paul'?

 

I really don't understand. I bought my LP because of - not despite - what the Gibson Les Paul is like to play.

 

As far as Chongo's comments on his Ibanez Artist - it is, indeed, a fine instrument. It has most of the 'improvements' in design over the LP and It plays like butter. Unfortunately, it is so neck heavy it is unwearable in a standing position because the strap-button on the horn is too far back.

 

I'll post a snap of my brother's Ibanez Artist which he bought new in 1978, just for the sake of comparison.

 

 

 

[esch]

What I don't like is how "non-Les Paul" players sometimes consider us to be "snobs". They don't realize the quality and sound of a Lester is totally unique and how great the les paul truly is.

 

The les paul is the very best guitar, period.

[sgTime]

What I don't like is how "non-Les Paul" players sometimes consider us to be "snobs". They don't realize the quality and sound of a Lester is totally unique and how great the les paul truly is.

 

The les paul is the very best guitar' date=' period.[/quote']

 

Yeah, same for the sg guys...

[pohatu771]

I have a hard time seeing the value of a Gibson, when you can get something very similar for less... and I'm not even talking about foreign-made... Heritage is making guitars in the Kalamazoo factory that are very similar to Gibsons, and as far as I can see, the prices are better.

 

I'm looking into buying a Heritage H-170 for my next guitar... but only if the dealer (we actually have one locally) will order me one... the one they have in stock is damaged. It's selling (locally) for $1100, and, other than the shape of the body, is identical to a Les Paul.

[LPDEN]

To me' date=' having a Les Paul is kind of like having a Corvette. No matter what year you have there is always an interest and certain good and bad points. And unless you have to, you will never want to get rid of it.

 

I have a '92 Standard which I played out for a few years. That ended when I had (left) shoulder surgery. Coincidence? Don't know. I rarely take it out of the case but still love it. I do wonder where a kid is supposed to come up with $2,400 though.[/quote']

 

+1! The Corvette comparison is very accurate, IMO. The 58 LP to me is like the '62 Vette and the '59 LP like the '67 Vette. The '75, through '82 LP's, Are all just like the '75 through '82 Vettes... Funny how that works..

 

As for the kid and his $2,400... I'm not sure starting off on a EPi is such a bad thing for a kid...