1971 Tele.

ronnyb

Saw this for sale in a local antiques shop. He's asking £3.5k. Thought it was an unusual place to find a guitar like this. 

tone1

It’s a Birth year for me, so if anyone wants to buy me a pressie? ........

Phil_aka_Pip

I wouldn't give that for any kind of tele, but just assuming you think the price is right: you're buying from someone who can't help you out if something goes wrong with it, he knows only what he thinks he can get for it. If he's done his homework he ought to know something about the history & provenance but how are you going to know if he's bullshitting you?

ICBM

Probably his own personal guitar.

It's not a '71 since it has the '72 body shape, but if he's dated it from the pot codes then it could be a '72.

It's very likely that it's genuine and original for that reason though - the later body shape doesn't get copied. The pickguard has been changed unless it's a '75 or later since it would have been white originally. The knobs may also have been changed since they're unusually shiny and un-pitted compared to the rest of it, and the 70s plating usually flakes badly (and dangerously, it's razor-sharp).

It seems like a lot of money for a 70s-shape Tele anyway though.

richardhomer

ICBM said:

Probably his own personal guitar.

It's not a '71 since it has the '72 body shape, but if he's dated it from the pot codes then it could be a '72.

It's very likely that it's genuine and original for that reason though - the later body shape doesn't get copied. The pickguard has been changed unless it's a '75 or later since it would have been white originally. The knobs may also have been changed since they're unusually shiny and un-pitted compared to the rest of it, and the 70s plating usually flakes badly (and dangerously, it's razor-sharp).

It seems like a lot of money for a 70s-shape Tele anyway though.

^

This.

I used to own a ‘71 that was the ‘correct’ shape. It was heavy, with a very thick finish and fret slots which were too narrow for the (original) fret tangs - which meant even with the truss rod fully slackened, no further relief could be added.

A used CS Tele is likely to be a better guitar in every respect - and half the price....

57Deluxe

is it currently in the Natural History Museum?

munckee

ICBM said:

Probably his own personal guitar.

It's not a '71 since it has the '72 body shape, but if he's dated it from the pot codes then it could be a '72.

It's very likely that it's genuine and original for that reason though - the later body shape doesn't get copied. The pickguard has been changed unless it's a '75 or later since it would have been white originally. The knobs may also have been changed since they're unusually shiny and un-pitted compared to the rest of it, and the 70s plating usually flakes badly (and dangerously, it's razor-sharp).

It seems like a lot of money for a 70s-shape Tele anyway though.

@Tone71 I was just going to phone him and haggle a deal as a little surprise for you.  Shame mate : )

MrBump

tone1 said:

It’s a Birth year for me, so if anyone wants to buy me a pressie? ........

Me too!  

Hattigol

Play it - does it float your musical boat in a wonderful way?
Can you afford it?
How would you feel if you went back tomorrow and it was sold?

The answers to these questions will tell you whether to get it.

impmann

I always thought the change to the notchless shape happened in early '72... happy to be wrong, mind you. :-)

ICBM

impmann said:

I always thought the change to the notchless shape happened in early '72... happy to be wrong, mind you. :-)

You're not wrong, hence why this guitar is not a '71.

octatonic

richardhomer said:

ICBM said:

Probably his own personal guitar.

It's not a '71 since it has the '72 body shape, but if he's dated it from the pot codes then it could be a '72.

It's very likely that it's genuine and original for that reason though - the later body shape doesn't get copied. The pickguard has been changed unless it's a '75 or later since it would have been white originally. The knobs may also have been changed since they're unusually shiny and un-pitted compared to the rest of it, and the 70s plating usually flakes badly (and dangerously, it's razor-sharp).

It seems like a lot of money for a 70s-shape Tele anyway though.

^

This.

I used to own a ‘71 that was the ‘correct’ shape. It was heavy, with a very thick finish and fret slots which were too narrow for the (original) fret tangs - which meant even with the truss rod fully slackened, no further relief could be added.

A used CS Tele is likely to be a better guitar in every respect - and half the price....

+1.

IMHO the only reason to buy a 70's Fender is because it will go up in value-- so it has to be pretty much original and not too much of a stinker.
If you want something to actually play then a modern CS is a better bet.

impmann

ICBM said:

impmann said:

I always thought the change to the notchless shape happened in early '72... happy to be wrong, mind you. :-)

You're not wrong, hence why this guitar is not a '71.

Er... confused.

The guitar in the pic looks to my eyes to be the eariler shape. IE pre-72 change...

Or am I missing something fundamental?

:-)

andrewaward

changed out pickguard could indicate it been routed for a HB

telehack

Maybe it's my aging eyes, but the bridge should have "Fender Pat No DES" and a bunch of numbers, arranged horizontally. These bridges (except for the 6 saddle ones) were standard from the early 60s until the early 80s. They are very expensive and rare on their own, so if this one doesn't have it, it's not original.

ICBM

impmann said:

Er... confused.

The guitar in the pic looks to my eyes to be the eariler shape. IE pre-72 change...

Or am I missing something fundamental?

:-)

That *is* the notchless shape .

No notch at the outer end of the pocket and the inside edge of the curve parallel with the 17th fret rather than just above it... hence it's the '72 shape.

This is the earlier shape -

http://guitarsandaudio.com/extras/2010GASpics/Fender/66Telecaster/66Telecty3.JPG

andrewaward said:

changed out pickguard could indicate it been routed for a HB

Yes... 

impmann

Ah, I see it now... thanks, sorry I'm being dumb.

I wonder if its a late 70s guitar, in that case - based on the black 3 ply guard etc and that he's just got the dating wrong?

ronnyb

Couple more pics.

ronnyb

ICBM

impmann said:

I wonder if its a late 70s guitar, in that case - based on the black 3 ply guard etc and that he's just got the dating wrong?

I admit it's hard to tell for sure, but the finish looks more like early-70s to me.

My guess given the claimed date is that it's an early-ish '72 with '71 dated pots, with a replaced pickguard with or without humbucker rout. What telehack says about the apparent lack of visible stamps on the bridge is correct too, unless they're just not clear in the pic. (Edit - they're there, you can see them in the new pic if you enlarge it.)

Also, if you blow the pic up to full size you can see that the switch screws are slot-head not Philips, so that's almost certainly been replaced too. The control plate screw at the tone knob end is also missing and the plate doesn't align with the hole in the wood, which may either mean that the plate isn't original or that it's had to be moved slightly to fit the pickguard.

It's actually amazing what you can work out from just one fairly low-res pic, in fact! But to be sure, you would have to see it - two minutes with a screwdriver in hand would tell you nearly everything. I would *definitely* want to see under both the control plate and the pickguard.

I still think it's overpriced no matter what though...

Tone71

MrBump said:

tone1 said:

It’s a Birth year for me, so if anyone wants to buy me a pressie? ........

Me too!  

And here, btw @MrBump I lol'd you by mistake, trying to hit the "quote" button!

I do like the idea of a birth year guitar but not at that price.