Alternative locking nut installation method

[plugger]

I was thinking about the installation of a locking nut on a strat-style guitar (Ibanez RX-20) that is currently fitted with the standard 1/8" thickness nylon (or similar material) nut.

The standard approach, of course, is to route the nut area flat so that that locking nut replaces the existing nut.

But what about installing the locking nut just behind the existing nut, approximately where the string tree would go (maybe a bit forward), so that the locking nut just locks the strings, but doesn't actually act as the nut?

The possible advantage of this is that you can set-up and file a standard nut much more readily than you can a metal locking nut, and so this may provide for finer adjustment in set-up (height, string spacing etc.) at the nut.

The only obvious disadvantage of this I can see is that it blocks access to the truss rod adjustment hole -- the locking nut would pretty much cover this now. However, given the relative infrequency of actually adjusting the truss rod for neck relief, I don't see this necessarily as a big deal. Access when required just means you have to remove the locking nut, which is two screws.

Any other advantages or disadvantages anyone knows of this style of installation?

The other possible advantages I can think of is that the installation is reversible if you want to go back to using just the standard nut by itself. It also probably eiminates the need for the string tree installation. Finally, no routing for installation required!

Thoughts or experiences anyone cares to share?

[brothersnowgone]

I think you named all the disadvantaes and advantages. It definately works, I've seen some older b.c. rich's with a nut designed like that. But IMO the normal way is still better. Your idea may make a tad more friction cause the lock is behind the nut, it's been done though so it should work fine.

[plugger]

Thanks for the info. It's good to know there isn't some fatal flaw in this idea I've overlooked. I'll probably try out this style of install first. If it doesn't work out for some reason, I can always try the traditional installation as a fallback - one of the advantages of this approach is that it is readily reversible.

I've been reading that luthiers are charging between $50 and $100 just to the bit of routing for a locking nut install, which adds substantiallly to the overall cost outlay. I'm trying to keep the costs contained on this project.

Other ways I was thinking of approaching this was to buy my own router and bits to do the routing myself (it would still cost $100 or more this way), or to buy a set of locking tuners and a graptech nut (still the best part of $100 for good quality locking tuners.)

Installing the locking nut in this alternative way would mean no additional costs (although I might spring for the graphtech nut anyway... if there was any problem with residual friction over the standard plastic nut, I think the graphtech nut would sort it out. It would have to be at least as stable as using a graphtech nut plus locking tuners then.)

Anyway, I'll report back when I try this out. It's a bit of a whimsical project really, trying to give an old guitar a new lease of life as a poor man's JEM... the main problem wth the RX-20 is really cheap hardware (tuners, vintage-style trem unit) that won't stay in tune. I've got a pair of duncan humbuckers going spare that should upgrade the electronics decently. The basic playability of the body and neck is quite OK...the frets are a bit skinny, but still quite playable.

If this works out, for the cost of the Gotoh FR hardware, I should turn an unplayed guitar which is now simply taking up space into a reasonable 22-fret FR dive-bomber to play around with all those stupid whammy bar stunts to my heart's content. At least that's the plan.

If stage one is successful, I may go the whole hog and buy myself the router to do the top body route... then I'll have the whole FR enchilada.

How deep is the "lions claw" route anyway?...