Tremolo bridge height adjustments and spring claw screw tension for floating bridge

[Permanent Waves]

I know the PRS Guitar Setup Specs call for the tremolo bridge to be about 1/16 inch off the body, and parallel to the body (floating). This gives space for upward tremolo bend of about half a tone or so. There's a certain amount of variance based on the model types and years as there seems to be differences in top thickness and the setting of the neck in the pocket.

I have 3 early 90's CE24 models (90, 92 and 95) where the bridge is laying perfectly flat on the body (NO gap or room to bend up). This allows me to get the action as low as I like it, but the low and high E saddles are set as low as they can go. There is no way to get the bridge off the body as per spec without making the action too high for me. I'm fine with this setup as I don't use the tremolo much and don't care if it is floating.

The only other tremolo PRS I have is a 93 CU24. That one has the bridge off the body by about 1/16 inch as per spec and floating parallel to the body with a little room for upbend. I recently had to do a truss rod adjustment detailed in another thread and wasn't too happy with the bridge floating that much. It is much more sensitive to pitch variations when the palm rests on the bridge, and the whole thing goes out of tune if I break a string.

I found that I much prefer the stability (and apparent increase in sustain?) with the bridge laying flat on the body like my CEs, but I cannot do that on the CU because the saddles are already pretty high and would likely not be able to make up the difference if I lowered the bridge by 1/16 inch.

Other than blocking the bridge, which I did not want to do that modification now, I decided to tighten the claw screws to increase spring tension and bring the bottom of the bridge resting on the top of the guitar (no more upwards bend movement). I know this is not spec but I don't like floating bridges (I barely use the tremolo bar) and I found this increases stability and sustain. It also keeps the guitar in tune if I break a string and prevents the "bridge bite" from damaging the finish if it comes down suddenly. If I started to use the tremolo extensively though, I would probably need to loosen the claw screws as it is pretty tight now, but I rarely have the bar in at all.

I was wondering if other players had any experience or input on this approach? Do you prevent the bridge floating by tightening claw screws and are there risks or drawbacks with this "out of spec" approach?

 

[JasonE]

Having the tail of the bridge down on the body makes the strings go over the saddles in a manner that they were not designed to. I guess if it intonates correctly it isn't really an issue but the saddles were designed for the string to lay in them in a specific manner. I personally wouldn't set mine up this way. I would probably block the trem or put a device in it to hold it in place. That way the ergonomics of the bridge are where they are supposed to be by design.

 

[aamefford]

I know the PRS Guitar Setup Specs call for the tremolo bridge to be about 1/16 inch off the body, and parallel to the body (floating). This gives space for upward tremolo bend of about half a tone or so. There's a certain amount of variance based on the model types and years as there seems to be differences in top thickness and the setting of the neck in the pocket.

I have 3 early 90's CE24 models (90, 92 and 95) where the bridge is laying perfectly flat on the body (NO gap or room to bend up). This allows me to get the action as low as I like it, but the low and high E saddles are set as low as they can go. There is no way to get the bridge off the body as per spec without making the action too high for me. I'm fine with this setup as I don't use the tremolo much and don't care if it is floating.

The only other tremolo PRS I have is a 93 CU24. That one has the bridge off the body by about 1/16 inch as per spec and floating parallel to the body with a little room for upbend. I recently had to do a truss rod adjustment detailed in another thread and wasn't too happy with the bridge floating that much. It is much more sensitive to pitch variations when the palm rests on the bridge, and the whole thing goes out of tune if I break a string.

I found that I much prefer the stability (and apparent increase in sustain?) with the bridge laying flat on the body like my CEs, but I cannot do that on the CU because the saddles are already pretty high and would likely not be able to make up the difference if I lowered the bridge by 1/16 inch.

Other than blocking the bridge, which I did not want to do that modification now, I decided to tighten the claw screws to increase spring tension and bring the bottom of the bridge resting on the top of the guitar (no more upwards bend movement). I know this is not spec but I don't like floating bridges (I barely use the tremolo bar) and I found this increases stability and sustain. It also keeps the guitar in tune if I break a string and prevents the "bridge bite" from damaging the finish if it comes down suddenly. If I started to use the tremolo extensively though, I would probably need to loosen the claw screws as it is pretty tight now, but I rarely have the bar in at all.

I was wondering if other players had any experience or input on this approach? Do you prevent the bridge floating by tightening claw screws and are there risks or drawbacks with this "out of spec" approach?

I've been teaching myself (by asking everyone here my questions) about guitar set up. It would be cool if you have time, to post some photos. So for, both of mine are set up floating. I'm giving strong thought to blocking my Santana though.

 

[Permanent Waves]

Good point about the saddle angle, I will look into blocking the trem instead. I guess I was so used to having the bridge flat against the body on my older CE's, I got used to thinking this is normal. Only when I got the the CU did I realize the bridge is actually designed to be floating. I think this is a design flaw in the earlier CEs as a neck shim would be required to get low action while keeping the bridge floating.

Agreed that a picture is worth a thousand words, so I posted some below.

First is my 1992 CE24. The bridge is flat and resting on the body, and you can see the E saddles are resting flat on the bridge as well.
With proper neck relief adjustment as per spec, I can get about 0.07 minimum string height on the low E at the 12th fret with a capo on the first.
It's as low as I can go and actually borderline high for me. The other option would be to shim the neck but I am happy with it for now.

Second is my 1993 CU24. The front of the bridge is about 1/16 above the body as per spec.
The claw screws are tightened down so that the bottom of the bridge rests against the body.
It is currently setup for a 0.06 action height on the low E at the 12th fret with a capo on the first, which very comfortable for me.
There is also plenty of room to lower the saddles and bring it down even more if desired. They have a pretty crazy angle as it is.

 

[Permanent Waves]

I decided to re-adjust the bridge to be parallel to the body as per PRS specs. I think that actually improved sustain, or at least did not take any away. I also fund an interesting video from PRS that shows how and why this should be done. It does mention that the saddle design is such that the optimum position is to have the bottom of the bridge parallel to the strings as per specs.

 

[Maxime Bousquet]

hi, just curious, what is the measurement of low and high E without capo at the 12 fret with this configuration!?

 

[Permanent Waves]

Right now both guitars have pretty much the same action - .07 under the low and high E without any capo. In order to achieve this on the CE24, the tremolo is flush with the body and E saddles are at their lowest.

 

[LerxstFan]

This is a timely read. I just picked up a new to me, DGT and I want to lower the action, but also want to preserve the best position for the string going over the saddles. I don't want to mess with the knife edge screws so I'll bring the guitar to John Mann and have him do a set up and lower the action.

One of the reasons I love stop tail PRS guitars is that I can get the action way lower than on my PRS guitars with a tremolo, but I also like using a tremolo once in a while.

 

[Broseph]

PRS floating tremolo is so good with a properly cut nut. Much better than any stock fender. It blows my mind some of you guys can play with such crazy low action. I would be a buzzing mess with my sloppy touch!

 

[Sebastian]

Right now both guitars have pretty much the same action - .07 under the low and high E without any capo. In order to achieve this on the CE24, the tremolo is flush with the body and E saddles are at their lowest.

Hello there. Just a question. Have you measured relief in fret 8 pressing 1st and last fret?

 

[JasonE]

This is a timely read. I just picked up a new to me, DGT and I want to lower the action, but also want to preserve the best position for the string going over the saddles. I don't want to mess with the knife edge screws so I'll bring the guitar to John Mann and have him do a set up and lower the action.

One of the reasons I love stop tail PRS guitars is that I can get the action way lower than on my PRS guitars with a tremolo, but I also like using a tremolo once in a while.

I don't remember seeing this post. I just wanted to mention that I run the same action on all of my guitars whether a stop tail or trem. It is possible to get the action down on a trem guitar to where you can get it on a stop tail.