1963 SG (Les Paul) Standard Refinished with Repo PAFs??

[Fil]

I don't think this was a conversion as they would have had to replace the dot inlays with the traps. A lot of work and the inlays look perfectly routed and correct to the era (mother of pearl). The neck looks like a repair, not a reset. Reset would indicate a different angle and I don't see that. What I do see is some wood filler right where you would look down if you were playing it. And what did they use as wood filler? Dog shit? Looks awful.
I agree with RLW59. It looks like they used a chemical stripper as there is evidence of it in the pickup cavities and the missing binding.
I hate to rain on your parade, but I would pass on this. There's too much that is unknown and would probably end up being a whole lot of work to make it right.

​

 

[RLW59]

I don't think this was a conversion as they would have had to replace the dot inlays with the traps. A lot of work and the inlays look perfectly routed and correct to the era (mother of pearl). The neck looks like a repair, not a reset. Reset would indicate a different angle and I don't see that. What I do see is some wood filler right where you would look down if you were playing it. And what did they use as wood filler? Dog shit? Looks awful.
I agree with RLW59. It looks like they used a chemical stripper as there is evidence of it in the pickup cavities and the missing binding.
I hate to rain on your parade, but I would pass on this. There's too much that is unknown and would probably end up being a whole lot of work to make it right.

​

In the first set of pics the inlays looked reasonably OK-- enough that we all assumed they were factory.

But those last pics -- that's not the sort of plastic Gibson used for those inlays. Bet if there was a close up of the 12th fret inlay we'd see the filled edges of the dots that were there originally.



And with the new pics we can see there's no ledge where binding would have been. Which means they either narrowed the neck to match the fretboard (there'd be signs of that at the body join), or they replaced the fretboard with a wider one.

Another thing I didn't mention before is the pole pieces were hitting the bottom of the bridge pickup cavity. At first I chalked it up to the replacement pickups having unusually long pole pieces. But now I think it's a shallow non-factory rout.

And the painted crown inlay on the head.
----------------------
3 grand is low for a clean Jr, but kinda high for a refinished and modded Jr.

But I really do think it would be a great candidate for a Fool replica. Bring the neck paint right up to the edges of the fretboard and the lack of binding wouldn't be very noticeable.

I'd feel a little queasy doing that to a clean or restorable Standard, but that guitar is the perfect starting point.

If the inlays are the right size it would be easy to put in better looking plastic.

 

[SoloDallas]

IF it ends up being a refinished junior with bubba “upgrades” then I agree.
That wood is still worth something, guys - I have owned countless ‘60s juniors, early and late - they’re just fabulous.
But it never having been an original standard (the picture of the ugly inlay and pole pieces touching are a clear indication) certainly tells a different story than what originally it seemed to be.

I’d probably lower my offer to 1.5k USD but I would definitely still be trying to purchase that project Guitar and make it a dream 1960s standard, with a history of bubba!

NO current (or even future) Gibson custom shop SG is EVER going to sound like the potential this one has.

 

[Trem man]

Its definitely low player grade at best. For 3K or less you can find a really nice used Custom Shop SG Standard. As for the Vibrola - I have one on my 1965 SG Standard and love it. As long as you use the proper nylon washers to hold the arm on place its a great wiggle stick, like a Bigsby.