F-112 questions

Rayk

Enlightened Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2015
Messages
5,769
Reaction score
1,172
That's "F112-6" copied from Porsche's naming convention for the 914-6 (6 cylinder version of a 4 cylinder design).
If you ask me how I know, I'll confess to being the culprit who came up with the suggestion.

Am I missing something?
Ralf's post indicates they got 4-7/8 depth in '76.

Yes your missing me not typing all the words I hear in my head again lol

Ok I took as just the F112 has the 4 7/8 depth .
I was wondering if any later models carried it but I guess it was just that 70’s period .

Forgive the Ray speak .
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
Yes, three very different animals. I was on the search some time ago and had the same question, so I had a conversation with Hans about them. Hans told me due to the high number of daily questions he has not much time to chat about different models, so I allow myself to repost what he explained to me:

"The '60s style F-30 body is more like a fingerstyle guitar with good definition and not a very deep voice. Really nice sounding in a 12-string. Not very aggressive. Bright and clear with not too much low end.
The '70s style F-30 body is more like a small jumbo; very well suited for fingerstyle but great for strumming. The deeper body gives it a nice 'low end' rumble, that some people like.
If you're a strummer, you should go for the '70s style but if you like intimate fingerstyle, the '60s style might be the better choice.
"

From my point of view I liked the look of the 60ties style much more.

Basically:

The 1968/1969 Hoboken is a physically lighter and smaller instrument. (similar to F30 body). 15 1/4" wide and 4 1/2" deep. 25 1/2" scale.
1970-1975 The Westerly is a small jumbo built like a tank.
In 1976, the body size changed to 15 3/8" body width and 4 7/8" body depth.

Until the end of 1977 they didn't have any position markers on the fret board.

1968 model: https://images.reverb.com/image/upl...0,w_1600/v1497461559/qkqjczjdlffuwkfngh6y.jpg
1975 model: https://images.reverb.com/image/upl...0,w_1600/v1461435394/wgqmrj254mtalwxupfin.jpg
1979 model: https://images.reverb.com/image/upl...0,w_1600/v1504297245/zvrs6fvadzyxwwyxccb6.jpg

Ralf

Ralf, thanks very much for all of this. this helped me tremendously. I have to ask though, how long ago did Hans give you this info? there is a chance that there was some overlap between the 68/69 version and 70/75 (while the mini jumbo may have appeared as early as 1970, the "Hoboken" version may appear as late as 1973 or so)

I picked a 1970 today, she is beautiful cosmetically, but was a roll of the dice, for sure, structurally. it should be alright. it is definitely the first generation ("Hoboken") shape and size.
 

SFIV1967

Venerated Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
18,442
Reaction score
8,956
Location
Bavaria / Germany
Guild Total
8
I have to ask though, how long ago did Hans give you this info? there is a chance that there was some overlap between the 68/69 version and 70/75 (while the mini jumbo may have appeared as early as 1970, the "Hoboken" version may appear as late as 1973 or so).
It was a few years ago, but Hans didn't give me exact years, it was just a basic discussion as I was once interested in one of them some years ago. I have pictures of 1970 models like S/N 50045 which are the "old Hoboken style". But for instance this end of 1971 one is already the new body style as it looks: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/theunofficialblueridgeguitarforum18213/1971-guild-f112-t11379.html
Ralf
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
It was a few years ago, but Hans didn't give me exact years, it was just a basic discussion as I was once interested in one of them some years ago. I have pictures of 1970 models like S/N 50045 which are the "old Hoboken style". But for instance this end of 1971 one is already the new body style as it looks: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/theunofficialblueridgeguitarforum18213/1971-guild-f112-t11379.html
Ralf


thanks Ralf, the one you post the link to looks like this one-
https://reverb.com/item/6130125-guild-f-112-1972-natural-w-case-1-owner

there is something about those 2, it might be the angle of the photos. i cant tell if they are the Hoboken shape or the Westerly shape. is there a chance there is a third variation in the middle?

the 1975 and 1979 ones have the same shape, just different sizes.

and also, if the 1971 turns out to be the same as the 1975...that does not mean the Hoboken one was not made past 1971, like I said above- there may have been some overlap when both variants were being completed during the early 70s.


here's the one I just picked. needs love but should clean up nice-

1vGHm8.jpg


thats the "Hoboken" shape, right? whatever it is it plays amazing even with needing lots of love and has original strings on it! still sings, and plays great! has the vibe i was after on this one.
 

bert

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Duluth, GA
Congratulations on your new F112.

The rounded lower bout is how I identify a jumbo or small jumbo.

I don't know for sure where my 71' F112 (4 7/8") was made, but it is a small jumbo in my mind. The earlier F112's in this thread look more like a trad Martin OM shaped lower bout. ??

m1P5Vat.jpg
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
bert, thanks. im just having a tough time telling which is which with all of these pictures angled facing down, and not straight on. I think u have the same one as me?

here is the "Westerly"
sxayjJ.png


and heres mine again (1970)

1vGHm8.jpg


these 2 definitely look different to my eyes.

i would call the "Westerly" a "Gibson mini jumbo" shape and
the "Hoboken" a "Martin OO-OOO" shape
 
Last edited:

bert

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Duluth, GA
Post# 26, Ralf linked to my post on UBGF several years ago when I reset my F112. Hans contacted me from that post for info but I don't think that I was of help in his query. Yes, the date on the traverse brace does show Nov 1971.

The shapes are a tad different to my old eyes, the one pic looks more like an OM/000 shape to me. I have a Martin 000 and Eastman OM, they both have more oval sides and more of a flat bottom at the end pin than the more round small jumbo.

Wish I could be of more help but best wishes in your research. bert
 
Last edited:

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
Post# 26, Ralf linked to my post on UBGF several years ago when I reset my F112. Hans contacted me from that post for info but I don't think that I was of help in his query. Yes, the date on the traverse brace does show Nov 1971.

The shapes are a tad different to my old eyes, the one pic looks more like an OM/000 shape to me. I have a Martin 000 and Eastman OM, they both have more oval sides and more of a flat bottom at the end pin than the more round small jumbo.

Wish I could be of more help but best wishes in your research. bert

i see now, thank u. your guitar is the same one Ralf posted. yes there are 3 versions, yours is the one in the middle, just like the one from 1972 that sold on Reverb the other day for 875+ 60 shipping.. wow, that version looks close to mine for sure, and the later 70s one- but its a little different than both. the 3rd variation (2nd half of 70s) is the clear different one. THANK YOU

next question-

do u all like the early 70s or later 70s "Westerly" version better?

I am confident at this point the one I just got is the "Hoboken" design. I may look for a variant now to compare.
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
Post# 26, Ralf linked to my post on UBGF several years ago when I reset my F112...
Wish I could be of more help but best wishes in your research. bert


Actually, you have been of tremendous help by clarifying that your photo, and Ralf's link are actually the same guitar (the one that you own), which I would have never figured out on my own! And because of that, it is clear now what is what.

I almost want to compare the late 70s version F-112 to a Hoboken F-212...maybe another forum member already has had this opportunity? no I am not buying all the guitars I ask about; and if I do...some will be re-sold!
 

bert

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Duluth, GA
Very cool mav, when I was doing the reset I put the process up on the UBGF as a topic of interest, which it was.. great fun and what a jewel of a guitar it turned into.
Thank you also, didn't know where my 71' was made, looks to be Westerly. bert
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
should i run 9's or 10's for strings on the 1970 F-112? I only play 11's on 6 string acoustics.

I have a new to me G-312 with new 10's. I feel like I am fighting the extremely flat fretboard on that one, not so much the strings. That guitar is 10 times heavier than the 112 though. I know most of you will say a 10 gauge set regardless...

any votes, at all, for 9's on the "Hoboken" (built in Westerly) 1970 F-112?? would anyone ever do that for any reason
 

D30Man

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
2,949
Reaction score
998
Location
Rockwall, TX
Guild Total
5
Post# 26, Ralf linked to my post on UBGF several years ago when I reset my F112. Hans contacted me from that post for info but I don't think that I was of help in his query. Yes, the date on the traverse brace does show Nov 1971.

The shapes are a tad different to my old eyes, the one pic looks more like an OM/000 shape to me. I have a Martin 000 and Eastman OM, they both have more oval sides and more of a flat bottom at the end pin than the more round small jumbo.

Wish I could be of more help but best wishes in your research. bert

Slight veer but which Eastman do you have? I LOVE Eastman guits. They are phenomenal instruments. Better than pretty much any other MIC IMO.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,790
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
Very cool mav, when I was doing the reset I put the process up on the UBGF as a topic of interest, which it was.. great fun and what a jewel of a guitar it turned into.
Thank you also, didn't know where my 71' was made, looks to be Westerly. bert

Yes by '71 they were completely gone from Hoboken, for construction anyway.
Can't remember if they still had some storage and repair there.
 

bert

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Duluth, GA
mav, I'm on my 4th set of Martin MFX700 Flexible Core SP strings. They are 10-54, the core wire of the wound strings are truly much more flexible than standard strings. Can't explain why but they just sing on the F112.

D30Man, I've been playing various Eastmans for a number of years. I got a new E20-OM-TC six weeks ago, Thermal Cured adi top over EIR. This guitar is as good as any hand-made boutique on the market, sits right between my Collings CJ and Bourgeois 00. yep, its that good.

I love good guitars, don't have any brand names tattoo'd anywhere.

Tim Shaw put together a new Eastman forum, came on-line 2-3mos ago. We used to hang out as part of the UBGF, where my above F112 reset link was posted a few years ago... new forum is dedicated to Eastman only:

https://www.eastmanguitarfans.com/
 

mavuser

Enlightened Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
8,128
Reaction score
2,636
Location
New York
bert thanks for the info. I put a set of John Pearse 10's on the G-312 based on how much I like the 6-string set on my mahogany 6ers, and will be looking to experiment with some different sets on that one, and really any 12-string, moving forward. For the F-112 for now I'm going with my luthier supplied 9's, which I believe are GHS- On this guitar, strings was my last concern up until yesterday, but now when I get it back (in about a month), it will be on like donkey kong to find out which strings sound best on her.

The F-112 was a survivor, definitely worth rescuing. it needs all of the braces and some binding re-glued, the bridge re-glued, bridge has small cracks between rear six pin holes but i'm sticking with it,the entire center seam of the top needs cleat, a second top crack needs cleat, no real cracks on back or sides (definitely some mojo however) the tuners need to be lubed and cleaned, pickguard needs to be reglued (but looks brand new and gorgeous tortoise!) the entire guitar needs to be seriously cleaned but will be fine, there was no label- and no evidence one ever existed, no case, no date stamp on the finger brace- however "5-13-70" written in pencil under the rosette, serial number (OA 109x) is barely there at all on back of headstock- but its there (seen this before in 1970), needs a couple weeks of humidity...

neck is dead straight. bridge and saddle never touched. frets look great, as does the fret board. the fret board and bridge are gorgeous figured Brazilian RW- which I did not even realize at first with all of the dust on the guitar. original tuners, original everything. truss rods never touched, TRC never removed. original strings (which still sound and feel great- which is to say yes, very "dead.)"
I guess that is kinda what I am going for. I had an F-412 and to me it just sounded like an electric guitar, right now the G-312 sounds like some pretty serious church music. I could not imagine playing either one of these with a capo, no matter how its tuned, ever. but the 1970 F-112, even with all of its issues, just seemed right from the first moment. I am realizeing I am just a mahogany guy, through and through. a mahogany *top* (and back) 12-string Guild may turn out to be everything id hoped and more, but based on my experience this far, and what I know of Tom Petty's music, even a spruce top mahogany back formula appears to be the 12-string for me, so far. The USA mahogany top 12s are not flat backs, and the imports are heavy poly, so while I may wind up with one at some point, I am holding off for now on those.

I played Sandy's NH F-512, just for a minute, but it seemed to have mellower tone somehow than my Westerly G-312 (we need to have the offical shoot out brother!). I'm not sure if the difference is more in the guitar, or the strings, or a combonation of both. The tone on that guitar was phenomenal- I just don't think im a 17 inch jumbo player (I would buy any guitar to fix up and sell however, if it was worth the rescue). Thats what makes each of us different i guess, and different instruments work for all of us.

i like 1970 Guilds, I own several. lots of mahogany. really looking forward to this one. thanks again all for your input. I have a 3rd variant on radar so feel free to keep this thread rolling. not sure how fast i can go for it though, if at all. If I buy that guitar I may wind up selling it (to one of u possibly?) 1970 is seeming like a keeper.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,790
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
should i run 9's or 10's for strings on the 1970 F-112? I only play 11's on 6 string acoustics.

I have a new to me G-312 with new 10's. I feel like I am fighting the extremely flat fretboard on that one, not so much the strings. That guitar is 10 times heavier than the 112 though. I know most of you will say a 10 gauge set regardless...

any votes, at all, for 9's on the "Hoboken" (built in Westerly) 1970 F-112?? would anyone ever do that for any reason

String nut that I am, I would say that I'm absolutely certain you can't harm it with 9's.
I might do it myself simply for the sake of preserving the neckset life, unless I though they were just too wimpy sounding.
And since I recently discovered how great my F65ce sounds tuned down a whole step with .10's (what it was designed for), I wouldn't hesitate to try that out if the 9's weren't doing it for me.
Since I'm notorious for suggesting stringing it with what it came with, I'll also point out that pb didn't exist yet when that guitar was built.
I'd probably try to find out what the formulas shown on the '72 list were (The closest list to your year of manufacture only list I have access too)
(just noticed they only offer bronze in light gauge for 12-ers)
http://www.westerlyguildguitars.com/files/pricelists/72-7.pdf
 

SFIV1967

Venerated Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
18,442
Reaction score
8,956
Location
Bavaria / Germany
Guild Total
8
thats the "Hoboken" shape, right?
I'd say so, especially as it seems to be more flat on the bottom whereas the later models were more round. Is it 15 1/4" lower bout, 4 1/2" depth? It almost looks deeper to me. At the end only Hans would know for sure regarding the slight differences in body size...
Ralf
 
Top