Swapping a 21 and a 22 fret neck - stupid idea?

IanSavage

Right, I've just acquired a Tele type with a maple neck that I LOVE the feel of, and what I'd really love to do is transplant it into my beloved Esquire-alike (with the happy byproduct of making it even more of a Springsteen 'tribute' looks-wise ). Trouble is, the maple neck's a 22 fret and the existing rosewood 'board one's a 21-fretter; having held the guitars face-to-face with their nuts touching (oo-er etc) it looks like there's only 5-6mm at most difference in where the neck meets the end of the pocket, which should be fixable intonation-wise just from the saddles, which leads me to believe that if the neck pockets are similar enough this COULD be a goer.

Anyone done this and/or know whether it's actually just a really fucking stupid idea and could save me a couple of hours of needless faffing? 

ThePrettyDamned

Don't see why not - the 22nd fret should be on an overhang.

That's the board, not my belly.

But my belly too.

DrBob

Yeah, what he said, I'd suggest that you take the 22 fret neck off and confirm that the 22nd fret is on an overhang. If it is, should be no dramas at all.

DrBob

That said I would add the caveat that you can occasionally run into problems with combining US bodies with Japanese/Asian necks and indeed vice versa but I that's more to do with the fact that U.S. stuff is made in imperial measurements whilst some, not all 'import' stuff can be a slightly different size as a result of being metric. But that's a width issue as much as anything else

IanSavage

Right, thanks for that guys - neck swap achieved and all seems well, shall string 'em up tomorrow and report back! 

JookyChap

DrBob said:

That said I would add the caveat that you can occasionally run into problems with combining US bodies with Japanese/Asian necks and indeed vice versa but I that's more to do with the fact that U.S. stuff is made in imperial measurements whilst some, not all 'import' stuff can be a slightly different size as a result of being metric. But that's a width issue as much as anything else

I've never understood why that is. If you measure something in cm and then in inches, how does the thing you are measuring change it's dimensions in between? Or is it only if you are watching?

DrBob

I've never actually encountered said issue myself in years of cavalierly slapping bitsa Strats together but I'm told that it can happen...

ICBM

JookyChap said:

DrBob said:

That said I would add the caveat that you can occasionally run into problems with combining US bodies with Japanese/Asian necks and indeed vice versa but I that's more to do with the fact that U.S. stuff is made in imperial measurements whilst some, not all 'import' stuff can be a slightly different size as a result of being metric. But that's a width issue as much as anything else

I've never understood why that is. If you measure something in cm and then in inches, how does the thing you are measuring change it's dimensions in between? Or is it only if you are watching?

Rounding errors and tolerances. Because the conversion figures are not exact numbers of mm or fractions of an inch, they will be rounded. If you then apply manufacturing tolerances to the rounded values, the results will be different from if you applied them to the original dimensions, and the parts may not fit together.

imalone

ICBM said:

JookyChap said:

DrBob said:

That said I would add the caveat that you can occasionally run into problems with combining US bodies with Japanese/Asian necks and indeed vice versa but I that's more to do with the fact that U.S. stuff is made in imperial measurements whilst some, not all 'import' stuff can be a slightly different size as a result of being metric. But that's a width issue as much as anything else

I've never understood why that is. If you measure something in cm and then in inches, how does the thing you are measuring change it's dimensions in between? Or is it only if you are watching?

Rounding errors and tolerances. Because the conversion figures are not exact numbers of mm or fractions of an inch, they will be rounded. If you then apply manufacturing tolerances to the rounded values, the results will be different from if you applied them to the original dimensions, and the parts may not fit together.

This is true, people working in inches tend to define things in exact fractions of an inch, in metric usually in precise mm measurements. The two will rarely line up.
However! I only found out recently, but exact conversion is possible as the official definition of the inch has since about 1930 been 25.4mm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inch#Modern_standardisation (1959 international agreement)

imalone

ICBM said:

JookyChap said:

DrBob said:

That said I would add the caveat that you can occasionally run into problems with combining US bodies with Japanese/Asian necks and indeed vice versa but I that's more to do with the fact that U.S. stuff is made in imperial measurements whilst some, not all 'import' stuff can be a slightly different size as a result of being metric. But that's a width issue as much as anything else

I've never understood why that is. If you measure something in cm and then in inches, how does the thing you are measuring change it's dimensions in between? Or is it only if you are watching?

Rounding errors and tolerances. Because the conversion figures are not exact numbers of mm or fractions of an inch, they will be rounded. If you then apply manufacturing tolerances to the rounded values, the results will be different from if you applied them to the original dimensions, and the parts may not fit together.

This is true, people working in inches tend to define things in exact fractions of an inch, in metric usually in precise mm measurements. The two will rarely line up.
However! I only found out recently, but exact conversion is possible as the official definition of the inch has since about 1930 been 25.4mm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inch#Modern_standardisation (1959 international agreement)