CV-2C...my review.

[zplay]

I have removed the neck on my CV-2C several times, using a 5/32 (if I recall correctly) ball-end allen wrench. It takes a little patience, especially if you have larger marfanoid hands like me.

With a small amount of careful neck heel sanding, I have gotten the action on mine within acceptable limits, but still not what I like. It may take some more extensive work to get this guitar playing correctly.

Otherwise, the CV-2c IS A GEM.

FINALLY, word comes that this can be done!! :shock:
Thanks so much, bazooka!

Could you provide a bit more detail, such as how much resistance you met in disengaging the neck? Also, just how you went about sanding the heel and if you were looking to increase the downward angle of the neck to the body or what?

And I fully agree with your last statement.

 

[bazooka47]

I have removed the neck on my CV-2C several times, using a 5/32 (if I recall correctly) ball-end allen wrench. It takes a little patience, especially if you have larger marfanoid hands like me.

With a small amount of careful neck heel sanding, I have gotten the action on mine within acceptable limits, but still not what I like. It may take some more extensive work to get this guitar playing correctly.

Otherwise, the CV-2c IS A GEM.

FINALLY, word comes that this can be done!! :shock:
Thanks so much, bazooka!

Could you provide a bit more detail, such as how much resistance you met in disengaging the neck? Also, just how you went about sanding the heel and if you were looking to increase the downward angle of the neck to the body or what?

And I fully agree with your last statement.

Well, here is what I did: CAUTION- it's easy to mess up a good guitar doing this kind of work on it, and I'm pretty sure it voids the warranty as well. Why did I undertake it, you ask? I really use this guitar for live playing (LOVE the way it sounds through the DTAR system), didn't want to ship it away for weeks or months as there are no Guild warranty repair centers nearby, and I try to do all my own maintenance work and setups.

Plus something tells me FMIC is not that motivated to do a recall/redesign on a discontinued model. SO, what are they gonna do- send me ANOTHER funky neck to bolt on?


There are 4 round head hex bolts that hold the neck on; one that goes through the neck block and into the heel, and three that attach the fingerboard to the top. Of the three "top" bolts, one is centered near the end of the fingerboard, and the other two secure a simple 1" metal bracket that is located AROUND, say, the 18th fret (don't have the guitar here with me). Looking in the soundhole, one can see the head of the bolt that attaches the heel to the neck block. The other three must be removed by "feel".

The fretboard extension has a graphite plate into which are embedded the threaded inserts.

Once the bolts are out, the neck comes off as easy as a Telecaster (at least it does on mine).

My purpose in sanding the heel was to put a little back angle on the neck. The problem with the factory setup as I saw it was the neck was angle was too forward, similar to an older guitar that needs a neck reset. The way I did it was to use strips of 220 grit, to which I applied some packing tape to the back so that sandpaper itself would not tear. With the neck held in place by hand pressure, the tape-backed sandpaper is pulled through the neck joint, 1 or 2 "pulls" at a time. This technique is widely used for neck resets and is illustrated (albeit with a Collings) here:


http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Luthier ... eset11.jpg


One thing I noticed is that the "top" bolts cannot be over tightened (especially the two that sit in tandem securing the bracket), without causing a pronounced hump in the fretboard extension.

Mine is still not perfect, and I may have to end up pulling the last 10 or so frets and planing the board. Your mileage may vary.

 

[capnjuan]

For those of you following along at home in your Mitch Miller Songbooks:

 

[chazmo]

Bottom line, guys, is that bazooka's neck wasn't glued on. This is what you'd expect (i.e., that's the whole point)... Sounds like you poor slobs with the glue have to conquer that glue as you would on, say, and older Taylor neck with bolt on heel (but glued fingerboard).

FYI, if that's the case, you can still use a resetting technique of sanding the heel (to change the angle) without ungluing the fretboard. It takes some doing, but my luthier did this for me on my old Taylor and the results were perfect. Essentially you remove all the bolts and you should be able to get sandpaper behind the heel. Depends on the guitar, of course.

Best wishes.

 

[cuthbert]

I have removed the neck on my CV-2C several times, using a 5/32 (if I recall correctly) ball-end allen wrench. It takes a little patience, especially if you have larger marfanoid hands like me.

With a small amount of careful neck heel sanding, I have gotten the action on mine within acceptable limits, but still not what I like. It may take some more extensive work to get this guitar playing correctly.

Otherwise, the CV-2c IS A GEM.

FINALLY, word comes that this can be done!! :shock:
Thanks so much, bazooka!

Could you provide a bit more detail, such as how much resistance you met in disengaging the neck? Also, just how you went about sanding the heel and if you were looking to increase the downward angle of the neck to the body or what?

And I fully agree with your last statement.

Well, here is what I did: CAUTION- it's easy to mess up a good guitar doing this kind of work on it, and I'm pretty sure it voids the warranty as well. Why did I undertake it, you ask? I really use this guitar for live playing (LOVE the way it sounds through the DTAR system), didn't want to ship it away for weeks or months as there are no Guild warranty repair centers nearby, and I try to do all my own maintenance work and setups.

Plus something tells me FMIC is not that motivated to do a recall/redesign on a discontinued model. SO, what are they gonna do- send me ANOTHER funky neck to bolt on?


There are 4 round head hex bolts that hold the neck on; one that goes through the neck block and into the heel, and three that attach the fingerboard to the top. Of the three "top" bolts, one is centered near the end of the fingerboard, and the other two secure a simple 1" metal bracket that is located AROUND, say, the 18th fret (don't have the guitar here with me). Looking in the soundhole, one can see the head of the bolt that attaches the heel to the neck block. The other three must be removed by "feel".

The fretboard extension has a graphite plate into which are embedded the threaded inserts.

Once the bolts are out, the neck comes off as easy as a Telecaster (at least it does on mine).

My purpose in sanding the heel was to put a little back angle on the neck. The problem with the factory setup as I saw it was the neck was angle was too forward, similar to an older guitar that needs a neck reset. The way I did it was to use strips of 220 grit, to which I applied some packing tape to the back so that sandpaper itself would not tear. With the neck held in place by hand pressure, the tape-backed sandpaper is pulled through the neck joint, 1 or 2 "pulls" at a time. This technique is widely used for neck resets and is illustrated (albeit with a Collings) here:


http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Luthier ... eset11.jpg


One thing I noticed is that the "top" bolts cannot be over tightened (especially the two that sit in tandem securing the bracket), without causing a pronounced hump in the fretboard extension.

Mine is still not perfect, and I may have to end up pulling the last 10 or so frets and planing the board. Your mileage may vary.

Like Dr.Frankestein Jr. would say:

IT...CAN...BE...DONE!!!

 

[capnjuan]

Bottom line, guys, is that bazooka's neck wasn't glued on. This is what you'd expect (i.e., that's the whole point)...

Hi Chaz; agree, that was the whole point but with all due respect, apparently some necks come off more easily than others. For the sake of a little conspiracy theory ( :shock: ), not having the neck stay in place or not being able to readily take it off could be why some of the COs/CVs were DQ'd at the factory or, worse, had their necks glued and screwed before they left? FMIC discontinued the use of the space-age system; does anyone really think it was because they caused bad tone?

 

[chazmo]

Bottom line, guys, is that bazooka's neck wasn't glued on. This is what you'd expect (i.e., that's the whole point)...

Hi Chaz; agree, that was the whole point but with all due respect, apparently some necks come off more easily than others. For the sake of a little conspiracy theory ( :shock: ), not having the neck stay in place or not being able to readily take it off could be why some of the COs/CVs were DQ'd at the factory or, worse, had their necks glued and screwed before they left? FMIC discontinued the use of the space-age system; does anyone really think it was because they caused bad tone?

Indeed, CJ. The system may not have worked well in all cases. Clearly, close (and repeatable) tolerances are needed to make a system like this work. Taylor seems to do it successfully with wood (mostly). This system has composites in it that you'd think would make it easier to produce. Maybe not.

Bad tone?? Well, I've seen a lot of debate over the years regarding bolt-on vs. set necks and it's certainly possible that there are insular effects of carbon fibre or whatever at play here... I just think it's unlikely. More likely, we're dealing with a system here that was a little difficult to produce correctly and Fender ran out of patience as it planned to shut down Tacoma.

I'll make a quick note that I played an Ensenada DV-4 recently that (we think) has a bolt-on neck (not this carbon box though), and that sounded just fine thanks.

 

[capnjuan]

Hi Chaz; I was just being facetious about the tone; ... putting words in someone's mouth to explain to the Board of Directors or stockholders why they weren't going to fool with it anymore. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that they'd given back every penny they made and then some on the COs/CVs via warranty/replacement/refunding. All we see is the retail side; I wonder what kind of heat FMIC took from its dealers. J

 

[chazmo]

Hi Chaz; I was just being facetious about the tone; ... putting words in someone's mouth to explain to the Board of Directors or stockholders why they weren't going to fool with it anymore. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that they'd given back every penny they made and then some on the COs/CVs via warranty/replacement/refunding. All we see is the retail side; I wonder what kind of heat FMIC took from its dealers. J

Well, we all know that releasing a product with latent problems is very costly in customer service. It sorta' justifies them dumping the Contemporaries into reclamation at the end. Sad, but understandable. Not at all like the dumpstering of the Westerly stockrooms that WiW told us about.

 

[cuthbert]

Hi Chaz; I was just being facetious about the tone; ... putting words in someone's mouth to explain to the Board of Directors or stockholders why they weren't going to fool with it anymore. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that they'd given back every penny they made and then some on the COs/CVs via warranty/replacement/refunding. All we see is the retail side; I wonder what kind of heat FMIC took from its dealers. J

I agree that this system costed them a lot, just in design, tooling and supplies, if they also had some warranty issues it's easy to understand that the contemporary line was not profitable enough.

On the other side, a bolt on system should cost less from a production cost because it should save time, in the end I seriously dubt they're going to say why they did it, what I find strange is while Bazooka's neck seems to work as advertized, yours and others were glued, that doesn't make much sense in the bolt on philosophy, so I've to assume that either your guitars were repaired or they were born with some issues and to keep the neck attached to the guitar in the end they glued it.

Out of curiosity, is your guitar recent or is it one of the first ones they produced?

 

[capnjuan]

Hi Cuthbert; sorry for any misunderstanding but I don't own a CO/CV. Yes; it's encouraging that Bazooka's works ok. I hope for Jeff and Scratch's sakes, their luthiers can get theirs corrected. Reminds me of a certain US car ...

 

[zplay]

I have removed the neck on my CV-2C several times, using a 5/32 (if I recall correctly) ball-end allen wrench. It takes a little patience, especially if you have larger marfanoid hands like me.

With a small amount of careful neck heel sanding, I have gotten the action on mine within acceptable limits, but still not what I like. It may take some more extensive work to get this guitar playing correctly.

Otherwise, the CV-2c IS A GEM.

FINALLY, word comes that this can be done!! :shock:
Thanks so much, bazooka!

Could you provide a bit more detail, such as how much resistance you met in disengaging the neck? Also, just how you went about sanding the heel and if you were looking to increase the downward angle of the neck to the body or what?

And I fully agree with your last statement.

Well, here is what I did: CAUTION- it's easy to mess up a good guitar doing this kind of work on it, and I'm pretty sure it voids the warranty as well. Why did I undertake it, you ask? I really use this guitar for live playing (LOVE the way it sounds through the DTAR system), didn't want to ship it away for weeks or months as there are no Guild warranty repair centers nearby, and I try to do all my own maintenance work and setups.

Plus something tells me FMIC is not that motivated to do a recall/redesign on a discontinued model. SO, what are they gonna do- send me ANOTHER funky neck to bolt on?


There are 4 round head hex bolts that hold the neck on; one that goes through the neck block and into the heel, and three that attach the fingerboard to the top. Of the three "top" bolts, one is centered near the end of the fingerboard, and the other two secure a simple 1" metal bracket that is located AROUND, say, the 18th fret (don't have the guitar here with me). Looking in the soundhole, one can see the head of the bolt that attaches the heel to the neck block. The other three must be removed by "feel".

The fretboard extension has a graphite plate into which are embedded the threaded inserts.

Once the bolts are out, the neck comes off as easy as a Telecaster (at least it does on mine).

My purpose in sanding the heel was to put a little back angle on the neck. The problem with the factory setup as I saw it was the neck was angle was too forward, similar to an older guitar that needs a neck reset. The way I did it was to use strips of 220 grit, to which I applied some packing tape to the back so that sandpaper itself would not tear. With the neck held in place by hand pressure, the tape-backed sandpaper is pulled through the neck joint, 1 or 2 "pulls" at a time. This technique is widely used for neck resets and is illustrated (albeit with a Collings) here:


http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Luthier ... eset11.jpg


One thing I noticed is that the "top" bolts cannot be over tightened (especially the two that sit in tandem securing the bracket), without causing a pronounced hump in the fretboard extension.

Mine is still not perfect, and I may have to end up pulling the last 10 or so frets and planing the board. Your mileage may vary.

This is great stuff. I'm going to take your description to my guitar tech first to see if he's willing to take it on, assuming that the neck
on mine isn't glued.

As to the tightening of the bolts that attach the fretboard extension, I've already played with these actually in order to try to reduce an upward slope or bend of this part that developed on its own. I thought it might have helped, but now with what you're saying, I may try to go back and see if some rebalancing of the tension between the near single bolt and the back pair of bolts will work better. Seems like a design flaw, not having a pair of bolts in the near position rather than just one.

 

[Jeff]

I have removed the neck on my CV-2C several times, using a 5/32 (if I recall correctly) ball-end allen wrench. It takes a little patience, especially if you have larger marfanoid hands like me.

With a small amount of careful neck heel sanding, I have gotten the action on mine within acceptable limits, but still not what I like. It may take some more extensive work to get this guitar playing correctly.

Otherwise, the CV-2c IS A GEM.

Seeing as how Fender, once they learned my CO1 wasn't a warranty issue, has stopped responding to my emails, I showed my guitar fixer, Brady the pics from this thread & your comments. He agreed to take another shot at it, but he insists I stay & watch.

From your comments I asume you had no issues with the finish, i.e the guitar & neck were finshed separately & assembled after the finish cured.

Could the problem hump in the fretboard extension be solved with a shim??

 

[bazooka47]

Well, I am not a luthier, but as stated I do a lot of my own repair work. The hump in the fretboard extension on mine has been somewhat reduced by backing off a little on those top mounting bolts. However, the problem isn't solved, and I don't feel it will be good in the long run.

I thought about shimming the fretboard extension but that may actually exacerbate the problem. I can't say I have quite figured out the physics of what is going on here, but it seems that the problem may lie in the graphite insert embedded in the fingerboard extension. It may actually make the fingerboard too stiff in that area so that it will not 'lie down' on the top, thereby preventing a 'drop off' on the part of the fretboard that contacts the top. I have studied some tutorials that describe a slight slope or drop off as being desirable (and sometimes inevitable since a neck reset changes the angle of the fretboard) for low, buzz-free action in the higher frets. I think one possibility is that the stiff graphite in the upper fingerboard prevents the flexibility that a smple wooden fingerboard would have.

I HAVE been able to get the guitar in great playing condition by 1) shaving the neck heel as described and 2) leveling the frets from about the 10th to the end of the fretboard. So, the guitar functions well now (nice low action), but when I sight down the fretboard the hump is quite evident, and it bugs me!

Ultimately I think I will need to plane the fingerboard level, which will involve a refret. I hate to have to refret a newer guitar, but if the neck joint remains stable that will probably solve the problem.

Another option, I suppose, would be to get rid of the top mounting bolts and go back with a new ebony fingerboard that doesn't have that graphite insert, and secure it to the top with hide glue, and just keep the bolt in the heel.

For now I am just going to play it and keep an eye on the stability. It is nice to have the CV back in action (acoustic show this Friday night -woohoo).

 

[kostask]

Bazooka:

I am speaking from ignorance here never having seen a Contemporary series neck, so pardon anything boneheaded. Is it possible to separate the graphite insert from the fingerboard extension, leaving just the wood fingerboard extension? How is it glued to the fingerboard, or do the inserts extend into the fingerboard material? Peeling a fingerboard off a neck is a real pain, and if you don't have to, why do it? If that can be done, then set up the neck angle as desired, and glue a shim into the space between the fingerboard extension and the soundboard. The surface area of the shim on both side should give you plenty of strength to keep the fingerboard extension where you want it.

Kostas

 

[bazooka47]

Hey Kostas:

Thanks for your observations.

I haven't seriously thought about how easily the graphite insert may be separated from the ebony fingerboard, but it looks as though the ebony was routed out and the graphite inset, probably glued. I don't have the guitar here so I am working from memory. From the looks of it, though, it may be quite difficult to separate the two without seriously damaging the fingerboard. I don't know how much ebony is left on top of that graphite plate.

I agree about not wanting to peel the fretboard. I consider that 'major surgery' and not something I really want to undertake if I can avoid it. I really think that planing the board is as far as I want to go, especially if that neck joint remains stable.

 

[Jeff]

Good news today, took my CO1 back it to Brady & the neck popped off just like it's supposed to. Problem seems to have been an excess accumulaton of laquer on the neck ( laquer run) where the neck meets the body holding things together. Looks like a relatively simple process to correct the neck angle from here.

concerning the graphite insert in the neck: I got a good look at it today, it appears to be fastened quite securely to the fretboard extension, glued in place.

 

[zplay]

Good news today, took my CO1 back it to Brady & the neck popped off just like it's supposed to. Problem seems to have been an excess accumulaton of laquer on the neck ( laquer run) where the neck meets the body holding things together. Looks like a relatively simple process to correct the neck angle from here.

concerning the graphite insert in the neck: I got a good look at it today, it appears to be fastened quite securely to the fretboard extension, glued in place.

Great news, Jeff!
I brought my CV-2C to my tech along with downloads from this discussion, asking him to adjust the angle. Might take a while for him to get to it, but I'm hopeful.

 

[cuthbert]

Good news today, took my CO1 back it to Brady & the neck popped off just like it's supposed to. Problem seems to have been an excess accumulaton of laquer on the neck ( laquer run) where the neck meets the body holding things together. Looks like a relatively simple process to correct the neck angle from here.

concerning the graphite insert in the neck: I got a good look at it today, it appears to be fastened quite securely to the fretboard extension, glued in place.

Very good jeff, if you have pics of the dissambled guitar please share, we can use this threat as technical info for resetting the contemporary series and other service our guitars may need.

Since FMIC decided not to inform the owners of these guitars about the peculiarity of the design, I guess we have to find it by ourselves, anyway, for what I understand, it seems that the bolt on construction and the patented graphite neck work as they were advertised...