strat trem upgrade adivce needed

phil_b

I have a 2001 MIM strat . the trem block was very thin and the saddles did not seem to sit right but I never did figure out why

https://www.gear4music.com/Guitar-and-Bass/Fender-Vintage-Style-Standard-Strat-Tele-Tremolo-Assembly-Chrome/QWU

I bought a cheap replacement from gear4music although it is a fender part. Now for my standard of playing it is probably good enough for now. but when I had the guitar set set up and the guy I took it to noted it was not a great trem. He described it as a bit clunky. I took that to mean it was a bit tricky to set up. I dont think he got it to float whey way he would have liked.

I like the guitar and think it may deserve an upgrade at some point. what should I be saving up for

Funkfingers

phil_b said:

I have a 2001 MIM strat . the trem block was very thin and the saddles did not seem to sit right but I never did figure out why

That is the Sung-il item, common to numerous mid- and low-price electric guitars.

The sustain block is cast zinc, lacks mass and, for that matter, the tone and sustain of steel.

The saddles come in various types: Bent, stamped steel like a vintage Fender. Solid cast ones that look a bit like the mid-Seventies type. Blocky looking, machined-from-solid ones that resemble Gotoh replacement bridges.

The way some saddles sit depends on;
1) how the vibrato baseplate is tilted relative to the top of the guitar body.
2) how loosely the height adjustment grub screws fit the threads through the saddles.

phil_b said:

I bought a cheap replacement … described it as a bit clunky. I took that to mean it was a bit tricky to set up. I dont think he got it to float whey way he would have liked. 

I take the tech’s description to indicate “not very precisely engineered”. The critical area is the “knife edge” where the baseplate meets each of the six pivot screws. 

There are other details, found on better quality bridges, that minimise the likelihood of strings breaking unnecessarily on sharp edges.

phil_b said:

I like the guitar and think it may deserve an upgrade at some point. what should I be saving up for

How bendy do you want to get? A Wilkinson WVVS vibrato would do the job and look traditional. Some of the Gotoh and Wilkinson/Gotoh designs would be a distinct upgrade. I like the old Kahler 25nn Fulcrum but obtaining some spare parts is now ridiculously expensive.

phil_b

Funkfingers said:

The way some saddles sit depends on;
1) how the vibrato baseplate is tilted relative to the top of the guitar body.
2) how loosely the height adjustment grub screws fit the threads through the saddles.

I did think the saddles may not have been original and the spacing was not correct causing them to fan out but I could be wrong about that. Another problem is the height adjustment screws had worn divots into the plate

andy_k

We had a long discussion in the Guitar section on this forum about the pros and cons of the strat trem.
The outcome was that many people do not understand how to correctly set it up, and in fact Fenders own advice is a bit mis-leading.
In the thread there are a couple of good videos which show how to set it up well for a wide range of movement.
It is my opinion, that the original design has some issues which affect it's reliability, and some things just have to be accepted, ie:- there is the possibility of wear to the pivot points and screws if careful attention is not paid to set up.
The issue is that when the screws are adjusted as is commonly advised, this does not allow the plate to pivot without some friction over the screws.
I mention this, as with a budget tremolo, this wear may become exaggerated, meaning it will become very difficult to have it function well.
If you are happy with the arm and actual bridge plate, you can easily upgrade the block and saddles-you just have to check some measurements, and even if you order a full unit you will have to check the screw pitch, I think Fender deliberately use different hardware on the Mexican lines to discourage parts from being swapped with the American stuff.
Check the screw holes in your bridge plate for wear, and if they are not too worn you should be able to get it adjusted to work as well as it can, have a look at the thread-it is titled something like -2 point trem v 6 point traditional, it contains a lot of good information about setting it up well, and I was going to update it with Fenders response to my e-mail to them about the bad advice they have on their site, they haven't got back to me.

phil_b

I found this video that has some good info

phil_b

It seems there are no aftermarket parts made for a Mex strat. There are two Wilkinson bridges that can be made to work because of the oversized holes but it will widen the string spacing slightly.

It seems just checking the string spacing is not enough as the Mex strat string spacing is very close to a USA narrow spacing. 

I just bought a brass block from northwest guitars 10.5mm spacing. The string holes and mounting holes line up perfectly to the plate from my Mex strat bridge. But the trem arm is not aligned so I can't attach a trem arm. (not much point in a trem with no arm)

I just bought a Mex body for a parts caster build and if I had known changing the trem from the thin zinc one was difficult I probably would have gone for a different body. 

CasperCaster

@phil_b having read your posts, you sound a little despondent about your 2001 Mex Strat and your partscaster priject, but there are options, but it all depends on price. I rate Fenders Mexican Strats, particularly the recent stuff (say, post 2010) as Fender have made many iterative improvements/ changes over the years of production, but instruments from all years provide enjoyment for many people. Regarding trems, I'm not sure if the bodies are routed slightly differently between Sung-il and later Ping-Well trems. However, the Ping-Well manufactured trem you have purchased should have PW29 stamped in the block, and it is definitely an improvement on the original skinny Sung-il trem. Sometimes the saddles of the PW trem are a little roughly made but they tend to sound alright, but the zinc block can be upgraded and Callaham, Wudtone and Kev Hurley all make high quality machined steel replacement blocks and arms that will fit. Callaham and ABM make complete high quality replacement trems - I have had both and can confirm they are excellent quality and fitted perfectly on my more recent Mex Strats. The steel baseplate of the PW trem is decent enough but not Callaham quality, but it will float and return to pitch very well if installed and setup correctly. Axesrus also sell a replacement trem with a cheaper compound steel block, but I have no experience of it, and in my experience you get what you pay for. One thing to watch for on older Mex Fenders is the accuracy of the six trem mounting holes. I have seen a couple which haven't been drilled in an accurate line, which will usually hinder return to pitch regardless of the quality of the trem. Without the trem on, put a straightedge against the holes to check by sight, then fit the screws all to the same depth (protruding perhaps 4mm - as if the trem were installed) and put a straight edge, fret Rocker or whatever flat to the body and against the edge of the screws (check both sides) and check again/ see if it rocks. Final thought, I don't know what Mex Strat body you have for your partscaster project, but as you know the Mex Stds and some Mex Deluxe Strats use the 52.5mm 6-screw mount bridge. Other models use a more vintage accurate 56mm 6-screw mount bridge (e.g. Mex Classic series and the earlier Ash bodied Mex Deluxes). Then there are models with the two post trem, Classic Player, current Deluxes, Mex Players.... 

phil_b

Well I'm still looking for a good quality trem. I though I found one from Halon guitar parts and was ready to order one but they are having supply issues at the moment and are out of stock of the one I wanted.

Callaham is definitely on the short list.

But I found an interesting trem by wudtone. Pit has a few small design features that try to help binding on the pivot screws of a 6 point trem. Are wud tone trems any good? 

DrBob

I’ve got a Wudtone trem on my main Strat and I really rate it, would go as far as to say it’s the best vintage style Strat trem I’ve ever used. That said in that previous thread about Strat trems that @AndyK referenced I think a point is made about the “whacker plate” component of the Wudtone being fundamentally useless if the trem is set up properly 

phil_b

@DrBob ;

Thanks for the reply. I will order the wudtone trem.

Just out of curiosity do you have the holy grail plate with the thick lip for the saddle holes or the more traditional looking vintage style plate

DrBob

When I bought mine it was the only trem he made but it has subsequently become the Holy Grail model with the separate, bolted on lip at the back 

normula1

The holy grail is very nicely made, and I still have one. It sounded too zingy on different guitar so swapped that back to the original plate but retained the block. At some point I will try the more "classic" model.

peanuts

I had one of the Wudtone “Classic” trems for a while and agree with comments that it’s a good option, especially in terms of its reliability, and also agree that the whacker plate was pretty pointless.

Ended up swapping it with a Mark Foley which I still use - perhaps ironically I’ve found the Foley a tad more temperamental, especially in terms of the trem arm threading etc, perhaps more akin to a vintage Fender which it’s meant clone.

The main reason I prefer it over the Wudtone is the tone is definitely different & I would say more ‘vintage’ sounding to my ears - couldn’t tell you what the difference is due to though! I’d hazard a guess at the composition of the block & saddles ?

phil_b

Well me wudtone bridge arrived.

Taking it out the bag I could not see how it was going to be any better but putting it on the guitar it definitely is. As far as tuning stability is Anyway. And the is very little play in the arm.

The is a plate that fits under the bridge that it pivots on giving it a more solid base the the wood. The body on my guitar had a mark in the finish where the old bridge was digging in. 

ICBM

phil_b said:

The is a plate that fits under the bridge that it pivots on

No it doesn't.

It pivots on the screws.

Sorry, I know this argument has been gone through several times in the past, but the idea that it pivots on the plate, or on the body if there isn't one, is simply physically incorrect.

The pivot point is the front of the knife-edge bevels in the holes in the bridgeplate, against the sides of the screws. There should in fact be a small gap under the bridge - if it rubs there, it will cause friction and tuning trouble.

phil_b said:

The body on my guitar had a mark in the finish where the old bridge was digging in. 

Exactly. It wasn't set up right - the pivot screws were too tight. If they're set correctly the bridge doesn't touch the top of the guitar at all unless pulled right back.

No doubt a new member will now register to argue the opposite, and then be proved wrong, and then get banned for being a previously banned member ... again.

phil_b

@ICBM ; thanks for the explanation that does makes sense 

It may just be the case that the old bridge was worn and was not pivoting correctly. It would settle in two different positions depending if you pulled up or pushed down. I set the two bridges up in the same way and the new one does works well. 

ICBM

phil_b said:

@ICBM ; thanks for the explanation that does makes sense 

It may just be the case that the old bridge was worn and was not pivoting correctly. It would settle in two different positions depending if you pulled up or pushed down. I set the two bridges up in the same way and the new one does works well. 

That does sound like it was rubbing on the body, or possibly that the knife edges or the sides of the screws were worn, which is a definite issue when they get old, especially on cheaper bridges.

I definitely don't disagree that the Wudtone bridge is very nicely made and does work well. What I don't like is the way he insists on basing its supposed advantages on something which is physically incorrect - it doesn't help anyone understand how to set up any bridge so that it works properly, even that one.