Help Identifying Used PRS... Again

[Black Plaid]

Don't see anything wrong with that!
Differences are the body thickness, the pickups (higher output on the Cu22), neck shape is wide thin on the Cu22 vs wide fat, locking tuners on the Cu22 vs vintage style tuners and control layout is 5 way rotary on the Cu22 vs the 3-way toggle on the McCarty.

All this is correct, just one other thing, didn't McCartys of this era have thinner headstocks?

Anyone know when that changed?

 

[munrodeo]

Thanks everyone for answering all my questions. I will definitely make a NGD post when my 2003 Custom 22 arrives.

 

[AP515]

All this is correct, just one other thing, didn't McCartys of this era have thinner headstocks?

Anyone know when that changed?

I could be wrong but I think the McCarty has always had the thicker headstock. But I'm, not including the 594.

 

[Black Plaid]

I could be wrong but I think the McCarty has always had the thicker headstock. But I'm, not including the 594.

I have a 2000 with the thin headstock. My Dirty 100 also has a the same thin style, so I know they were at least doing them up until 2009. My 2016 McCarty (non 594) has the thick one.

 

[tonytester]

Good plan. Not that there's anything wrong with the S2; just saying I would also continue searching for CE24 or core Custom 24. Guitar buying is about personal preference.

wait for a core custom 24 , if you don't you just won't be happy. and you will always be looking . just mho

 

[Jazzedout]

All this is correct, just one other thing, didn't McCartys of this era have thinner headstocks?

Anyone know when that changed?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe all McCartys had the thinner headstock until their reintroduction as a model at the same time they put binding as well.

 

[AP515]

I have a 2000 with the thin headstock. My Dirty 100 also has a the same thin style, so I know they were at least doing them up until 2009. My 2016 McCarty (non 594) has the thick one.

I'm not sure what any of us consider thin and not thin. I brought my micrometer home from work and measured all the headstocks on non-fender and non bass inventory. They are in inches as follows (sorted by year):

1988 PRS CE24 = .6540
1995 PRS CE22 = .6240
1998 PRS McSoapy = .6035
2000 PRS SC = .6030
2002 PRS Cu24 AP Stoptail = .6495
2003 PRS Standard = .6755
2004 PRS SE EG = .6425
2004 Heritage H150 = .6015
2005 Heritage H150 = .6795
2006 PRS Cu24 AP = .6615
2006 PRS SC AP 20th Anni = .5995
2007 PRS CuRO22 = .6880
2007 PRS SE Soapy 2 = .6240
2008 PRS SC HB1 w/Piezo = .5860
2010 PRS Mira = .6275
2012 PRS SE Bernie = .6210

So for the analysis, my 98 McSoapy is thin but not the thinnest. The HB1 is the thinnest. The two SC's are thinner than the McCarty. The thickest is the Brazilian rosewood neck. One LP is slightly thinner and one is much thicker than the McCarty. The average is .633.

I think one could say the Kluson style tuner equipped models are thinner than the PRS locking tuner models, but the difference isn't an eighth of an inch, it is about one 20th of an inch. I think once they get done sanding and painting, the differences get mixed all around.

 

[Black Plaid]

I'm not sure what any of us consider thin and not thin. I brought my micrometer home from work and measured all the headstocks on non-fender and non bass inventory. They are in inches as follows (sorted by year):

1988 PRS CE24 = .6540
1995 PRS CE22 = .6240
1998 PRS McSoapy = .6035
2000 PRS SC = .6030
2002 PRS Cu24 AP Stoptail = .6495
2003 PRS Standard = .6755
2004 PRS SE EG = .6425
2004 Heritage H150 = .6015
2005 Heritage H150 = .6795
2006 PRS Cu24 AP = .6615
2006 PRS SC AP 20th Anni = .5995
2007 PRS CuRO22 = .6880
2007 PRS SE Soapy 2 = .6240
2008 PRS SC HB1 w/Piezo = .5860
2010 PRS Mira = .6275
2012 PRS SE Bernie = .6210

So for the analysis, my 98 McSoapy is thin but not the thinnest. The HB1 is the thinnest. The two SC's are thinner than the McCarty. The thickest is the Brazilian rosewood neck. One LP is slightly thinner and one is much thicker than the McCarty. The average is .633.

I think one could say the Kluson style tuner equipped models are thinner than the PRS locking tuner models, but the difference isn't an eighth of an inch, it is about one 20th of an inch. I think once they get done sanding and painting, the differences get mixed all around.

Wow, nice round up!

It's more the 'thinner' headstock I guess. It's not "thin" by any means, there's some visible difference to me somehow. I would probably group them into ~0.600 and ~0.6500 (with those 0.6250s throwing the proverbial wrench into the works)

This is a fun list, I'll bust out the Verniers and add to this when I get a chance!

 

[munrodeo]

wait for a core custom 24 , if you don't you just won't be happy. and you will always be looking . just mho

Yes, took the advice and pulled the trigger on a used Core Custom 22. I have a 24 fret Rickenbacker and I find I don’t get up to the dusty end of the fretboard often enough to need another 24-fret tee.

 

[Black Plaid]

Wow, nice round up!

It's more the 'thinner' headstock I guess. It's not "thin" by any means, there's some visible difference to me somehow. I would probably group them into ~0.600 and ~0.6500 (with those 0.6250s throwing the proverbial wrench into the works)

This is a fun list, I'll bust out the Verniers and add to this when I get a chance!

I finally remembered to do this.

The "thick" headstocks are in the 1.6 cm range, and the 'thin' ones are 1.5 cm. The ones with painted headstocks (as opposed to veneers or just straight rosewood) seem to be thicker, with my old '91 blue sparkle coming in at close to 1.7!

Crazy how 1mm can be seen to be different at a glance.

 

[AP515]

...Crazy how 1mm can be seen to be different at a glance.

That's about 1/32 if an inch. I agree...crazy.