How Thick Is An SG Supposed To Be?

[Murph]

My '79 "The SG" Walnut is about 1-3/16" - 1-1/4" .

 

Is this a standard? I've never wondered before.

 

I don't even know why I'm wondering now, actually......

 

Murph....

[jimmiJAMM]

That's what she said.#-o/

[chongo]

My '79 "The SG" Walnut is about 1-3/16" - 1-1/4" .

 

Is this a standard? I've never wondered before.

 

I don't even know why I'm wondering now' date=' actually......

 

Murph....[/quote']

 

It's a very thin body and, in fact, one of the thinnest solid bodies ever built. I was thinking 1 1/8" was standard for those. It's why you don't find standard trems on them -- most need a deeper rout. A Kahler Pro will just barely fit, but it has a top-only rout and doesn't need the spring box underneath. That's one of the OTHER reasons why gibson had such problems with the early versions -- they had the neck pickup too close to the neck and there wasn't enough meat between the body and the neck. People were breaking the necks easily. So they moved the neck pickup closer to the bridge pickup as part of the solution. That's why Gibson had little problem putting an extension on the fretboard and making it a 24 fret neck for some of their "special" models.

[hbomb76]

I don't have my trusty old Guitar History SG book handy, but if I recall the 70's (Norlin) era saw a slight increase in body thickness. That's why Epiphone SG's don't feel odd to me, because I had a '74 and '79 for a while. The overall outline of the guitars from late-'71 on (even still slightly nowadays) was different than the 60's models too, but that's more obvious.

 

H-Bomb