Mexican Baja 2010

blueskunk

^^^ that can be levelled at loads of guitars , models and where they are made. 

A good Baja beats a good CV any day of the week. Twice on Sunday's. 

mikeyrob73

My thoughts are if the Baja is better is to trade the PRS for the Baja, then trade the CV for something else, thus upgrading the Tele and then getting something else in with p90s , which covers me for humbuckers ( Explorer) Tele ( Baja) then A.N.Other with p90s without actually spending to much money :-) 

AndyR

Johnnyseven said:

Chalky said:

The CV is a good guitar FOR THE MONEY. But the pickups on the Baja are much much better.

But are they £300 better?

LOL - that's why I hedged my bets at the start of the thread.

For some folk (me), the CV is great value, great guitar, but NO WAY DO I EVER WANT ONE MYSELF (skinny neck, etc, etc) - it's not any value for money for me. The Baja is well worth the higher price to get what I want.

For some others, the Baja is the same - good stuff, but no way do they want one. But they do love the CV.... So, for them, the Baja (and beyond) is wa-ay over-priced. But they weren't gonna buy it anyway, so who cares?

But there's some other folks who like both - I'm talking folks who'd like them enough to buy them... I'm intrigued to know where they'd stand on the £300 difference... If it was me, if I liked both "equally", I'd go for the CV.

Johnnyseven

I'm in the same camp as you, both are really nice guitars but I don't see a reason to shell out the extra for the Baja - particularly as I tend to replace pickups for my favourite set anyway. But then I really liked the CV neck (and wouldn't describe it as being particularly skinny) whereas others don't, I regret selling mine on. I have a 50's Baja neck at home, albeit with more of a c profile, and there's not much in it as far as I can tell when comparing it with the CV neck - apart from the tint on the CV.

Johnnyseven

I've played both the butterscotch CV and Baja and the finish on both made them feel like I was playing a Werthers Original.

AndyR

I'm now starting to wonder how much time I spent with the CV tele! I definitely tried one when they came out, but I was concentrating more on the CV strat at the time - and that was definitely skinny, I remember being quite disappointed, I actually wanted to get one, but when I tried it I really didn't like it. But on the tele, I'd just bought the Baja, so I wasn't in the market for a tele. I dunno - I've been sure all this time that the CV tele and strat felt similar...

I have heard rumour that the "big soft v" of the 50s Baja neck is not as big on newer models as it was on the earlier (2009 or so) models. But I haven't tried a new one recently.

Oh, and whisper this(!) - I really didn't get on with the pickups in the 50s Baja... (I even tried them later in a CIJ "52", still didn't like them). Everyone was raving about the stock pickups, but I switched them for Bare Knuckles and the guitar turned into one of my favourites - still is, even now... I bought a 60s Baja last Christmas, and that one suited its own pickups much better for me - but I put Bare Knuckles in anyway, because I had a Yardbirds set that weren't reaching their full potential in a MIJ Custom. The 60s Baja is my favourite to look at, but I'm still looking for optimal set-up etc for this one, I may yet change pickups again. And, yeah, I'd forgotten the tint on the CVs, that WAS tasty... the neck on the 60s Baja is VERY pale (the rosewood board on mine is very very nice though).

Interestingly, when I bought the 60s Baja, there were three Sonic Blue with Rosewood board teles in the shop - a cheaper MIM, this one, and an AVRI, probably twice the price. From a distance, they pretty much looked the same. Handling them, the MIM felt cheaper to me, the Baja and AVRI were close, very close. I was prepared to pay for the AVRI, or accept that the cheapest one was the best player... But as it turned out, for my tastes, the Baja was the better player and sounded absolutely fabulous. Passers-by (and the wife, actually) were going "that one".

blueskunk

My 60s Baja didn't have that gloopy finish like some of the 50s models. 

stimpsonslostson

Lots of comments on the finish of the Baja being a bit thick reminded me of this thread, the thin finished end result is BEAUTIFUL and gave me a lot of hope when refinishing my own tele build (which also involved taking off a super thick poly coat to reveal a surprisingly nice piece of wood underneath: 

The baja refinish:

http://thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/25693/ngd-born-to-run-baja-telecaster/p1

My own amateur attempts at refinishing a tele:

http://thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/34236/stimpsons-te52/p1

Chalky

I just don't get the attraction of the CV tele - I tried to like it but it simply wasn't a keeper for me. Good, but only if you left the price tag on it.

blueskunk

Yep, it's a good squire guitar, nothing more.  I found the pine body lacking too. 

Great for a pissabout but that's it. 

andyp

Well, the Bajas I've been looking at don't seem to be selling. No interest on one at £500, one at £350 start had a couple of bids only but didn't meet reserve. Another at £550 start surely won't sell at either. One sold recently at £420 ish I think... this suggests the £400-450 mark is about right then, I guess. These are all nice guitars, but I think these guys are simply asking too much money.

Andy

AndyR

Yeah, I'm not selling, but realistically I'd reckon about £450 for a used Baja if you were patient (as a seller, that is).

Maybe if I was selling, I'd want more(!)

If I was after another myself, was prepared to go used, and was patient, I reckon I should be able to find one below £400 - not sure how long that will last, though.