RG vs RG - Why different thickness? - Page 2 - Jemsite
All Other Guitars (including Prestige) Discussion about other Ibanez Guitars not covered in the above topics. Includes J-Custom, USA-Custom, Prestige subforum.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #16 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-20-2001, 10:46 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

Quote:
gkelm: maybe you meant cm instead of mm.
No, dude.
I meant quite millimeters! I mean, a body is 45 millimeters, not centimeters!

Anyway, I've watched many of El Pablo's early neon RG prototypes, and they're clearly thinnest then PGMs and other RGs!

Why Paul should play thinnest/cheapo RGs?
nuno is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-20-2001, 11:26 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 1,568
RG vs RG

Argh...brain lapse...yes, mm indeed. *Anyway, good topic. *I've not heard RG body variations discussed before.

I would actually like a thinner RG if it was a higher end model. *I'm kinda torn beteen the Saber body and the RG...the S is so sleek, light and comfortable, but the RG has more mass and tone, but just a bit too think and heavy for my taste. *I think either a slightly thinner RG or slightly thicker S would be great....what the heck, let's have both.
Greg
gkelm is offline  
post #18 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-20-2001, 12:30 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

Greg, you're right!

I would like to have an RG w/ a smaller body!
It would be even aesthetically better, cause, unless you're tall as God Vai & El Pablo, you medium tall guy, look like a dwarf behind an RG!

That's why I like guitars w/ a smaller body size, like Phil Collen's Arch Top by Jackson (the 1st one), or Nuno's N4 by Washburn.


nuno
nuno is offline  
post #19 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-20-2001, 08:18 PM
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 306
RG vs RG

I noticed the difference in body thickness, too. *When I was in a store, I picked up an RG350DX and it felt REALLY light and just didn't feel right. *So I compared it to a 570 and it was noticably thinner than the 570. *-Andy
bachle7 is offline  
post #20 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-21-2001, 07:22 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

I prefer the thicker body.
It has more tone & sustain, and it looks less splattered to the floor!
nuno is offline  
post #21 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-21-2001, 04:09 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 554
RG vs RG

I really like the feel of the 350 DX. I actually prefer the neck profile to the Wizard on my 570's. Plus it looks way cool.

* I've never noticed an appreciable difference in the body thickness...then again, I wasn't looking for it, either.
jeff l is offline  
post #22 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-21-2001, 05:31 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

Take a look to both yer 350 and 570. You'll notice it!

Anyway, I feel good with both my 270 and 550. I don't care much if one is thicker than another. I just play them!
Mine was only curiosity.

nuno
nuno is offline  
post #23 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-21-2001, 07:45 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 554
RG vs RG

I don't own a 350....just the two 570's. *A friend has a 450 DX and I played the 350 at the local music store.
jeff l is offline  
post #24 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-28-2001, 05:36 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 638
Reviews: 2
RG vs RG

Oh My God. I can't believe you haven't figured this out.


IT'S THE LENGHT OF THE BLOCK ON THE WHAMMY

I was going to put a lo pro into my 520 but the length is longer (To balance out the weight) hence the guitar would need to be a bit bigger otherwise teh block will be constantly scraping the trem plate.

Althought I haven't measured both my RG's but that's my opinion.
Pablo is offline  
post #25 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-28-2001, 09:25 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 554
RG vs RG

Pablo,
They're referring to the actual body thickness, not the size of the trem cavity.
jeff l is offline  
post #26 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-28-2001, 11:41 PM
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 306
RG vs RG

Pablo,

Yeah, you really lost me there! *What are you talking about? *Besides, I thought that the Edge and Lo-Pro were completely interchangable on RG5xx guitars.
bachle7 is offline  
post #27 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2001, 07:50 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

I've carefully watched the new (amazing, to me) Dave Weiner model, and it seems to be THINNER than other RGs.
And it features a Lo-Pro 7.

Plus, I happen to interchanged various Edges & Lo-Pros on my RGs, but they had no problems, block lenght-wise.

Unless you (Pablo) have the spring-lock bar screwed only to one Edge, and not to the other.
The spring-lock bar maybe could scrape the trem-plate (just an opinion, I never happen to have problems like this)

Who knows?
nuno is offline  
post #28 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2001, 04:00 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 638
Reviews: 2
RG vs RG

OK I had a quick look at both my RG's and I'm stumped

I was comparing my two Edge trems, one lo pro the other normal edge. I never mesured the thickness of teh RG's tho

But.....for the *lo pro trem, it's block, the bit where you plug in the springs was longer *than a standard Edge

It was longer I would say by half a centimeter at least.
but to affect body thickness it depends how much the whammy is rececssed too. Angle of neck pocket.

I was a bit put out when it looked like the lo pro would press against the trem plate so i didn't fit it. i'n not going to waste a packet of strings for no reason.

Also in another topic I'll tell of my setup woes.
Pablo is offline  
post #29 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2001, 04:57 PM
Vendor
 
Rich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 25,700
RG vs RG

I don't know why 1 is thicker than the other, but I do know it's not to compensate for a different trem block. The blocks come in different sizes and are mated to the depth that is needed.
Rich is offline  
post #30 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2001, 12:12 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 4,725
RG vs RG

Pablo... keep the trem plate off!


nuno
nuno is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
custom shop , dave weiner , edge trem , edge trems , hoshino gakki , ibanez acoustic , jem neck , jem neck profile , joe satriani , korean guitar , local music store , music store , neck shape , phil collen , pro edge , strat plus , trem block , trem plate , wizard neck profile

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Jemsite forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address

IMPORTANT: You will be required to activate your account so please ensure that your email address is correct.

If you do not receive your activation check your spam folder before using the CONTACT US form (at the bottom right of each page).



Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Neck Thickness whitestrat All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 4 03-07-2012 01:42 PM
DY neck thickness jemboyee Ibanez JEM, UV, JS & Other Signature Models 5 01-30-2010 02:28 PM
String thickness? J-universe Tech: Setup, Repairs and Mods 10 12-20-2007 12:03 PM
Skull thickness AmazinAzian12 Off-topic / Miscellaneous 70 02-12-2007 01:53 AM
Guitar Neck Thickness robinson Gear, Equipment, Recording & Off Topic 4 09-28-2004 11:06 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome