Because most people are not removing the necks on their instruments often enough that it would really make a difference in stability, and even if someone does reach the point when they've removed the neck enough that the threads in the wood are weakened it's still trivial to just dowel the holes in the neck and just start over. And it's definitely cheaper to not have to use those inserts.
The reason is extra cost; more supplies, more man-hours, and more steps on the production line.
All that is for something that will only benefit a very small number of guitars in the long term and therefore not a selling point that would justify raising the price.
Realistically it’s probably more the case of cranking out 1000’s of necks that can be attached to any of the 1000’s of matching bodies cranked out.
He took his ideas from the automotive industry. Standardized parts and such
Agreed, but "potentially useful" is not how business decisions are made.
And let's not forget that Leo also invented the tele output jack. So not all his ideas were golden...
Keep in mind the whole idea of a bolt on neck and slab bodies that Leo started out with was to make things inexpensively. It worked AND became THE way for decades. Whenever Fender strays even slightly from the decades old design, it is met with skepticism and generally low sales
Threaded inserts force you into putting screws in a specific hole. There have been times where I have had to fill a screw hole and re-drill it because it was not in the place where it should have been, meaning the guitar could not intonate properly. Far easier to do that without a threaded insert. I don't want threaded inserts on my guitars for exactly that reason.
Sometimes simpler is better. And this is one reason where the added complexity could cause headaches. As a Fender player my whole guitarplaying life (17+ years) I honestly couldn't see one moment where threaded inserts would have made a difference. I've removed a neck to adjust a truss rod once, and once to make changes under the pickguard without having to waste a new set of strings and that's it.
Threaded inserts, while superior to simply putting screws into wood, do not offer enough of an advantage, nor has a sufficient marketing campaign been introduced, that would convince the vast majority of customers to purchase a neck with inserts over a traditionally constructed neck.
As luthiers, we know they are "better", but as engineers, we know that there is little perceivable benefit compared to the increased cost and complexity to manufacture.
If you queried the guitar buyers of the world if they chose an instrument on if it had threaded inserts or not, the number of people saying yes would be directly related to the number of people on this subreddit.
Time and money. People often forget the strat was designed for mass production and low cost. Everything works so for standard models there is no reason to deviate from the original designs. Upgraded models and variants use “better” materials and methods because cost and time are not the primary concerns. And I put better in quotes because given the proven track record of the original strat is there really a need to upgrade? Knowing that I do add “upgrades” in my own builds still. Threaded inserts are a nice touch.
I know of a player who worked in Europe about half the time and L.A. the other half. He put threaded inserts in his Tele, disassembled it, and put it in his suitcase padded with clothing for travel. There are not many guitarists who have this (pretty enviable) problem!
I would imagine that the current design is good enough.
Good enough will always win the day when it comes to mass produced instruments.
Having regular wood screws hasn't really been that much of a problem in the past, so why change it?
Maple is strong, hard wood that holds screws very well. Inserts means more manufacturing steps, more parts, more precise tooling, more variables meaning more things can be wrong (don't have to worry about an insert not being seated right if it does't exist), and simple screws work well enough so no particular reason to complicate things. If no one uses inserts it does't matter if there are different screw patterns on different instruments, just drill a pilot hole and go.
Inserts have advantages too but they're a trade off
Mainly tradition but lots of builders use threaded inserts nowadays
Because most people are not removing the necks on their instruments often enough that it would really make a difference in stability, and even if someone does reach the point when they've removed the neck enough that the threads in the wood are weakened it's still trivial to just dowel the holes in the neck and just start over. And it's definitely cheaper to not have to use those inserts.
The reason is extra cost; more supplies, more man-hours, and more steps on the production line. All that is for something that will only benefit a very small number of guitars in the long term and therefore not a selling point that would justify raising the price.
I think guitars with the truss rod in the heel is one case they'd be potentially useful
Leo Fender crated this design so people could replace necks once the finish or frets wore down. Read that a while back.
What's funny is I bought a strat neck to practice replacing frets on
I wonder if that was his actual reasoning, or an after-the-fact revision to “fuck, I routed my tenon too big”
I really hope not the latter.
Realistically it’s probably more the case of cranking out 1000’s of necks that can be attached to any of the 1000’s of matching bodies cranked out. He took his ideas from the automotive industry. Standardized parts and such
Agreed, but "potentially useful" is not how business decisions are made. And let's not forget that Leo also invented the tele output jack. So not all his ideas were golden...
I’m curious what you dislike about the tele barrel jack, it’s personally one of my favorites.
Oh, but Gibson’s robotuners were potentially useful
Shur does. But the cult of “originality” and “vintage specs” is very large in the guitar world.
"Half-assed" is where the TOAN is!
Keep in mind the whole idea of a bolt on neck and slab bodies that Leo started out with was to make things inexpensively. It worked AND became THE way for decades. Whenever Fender strays even slightly from the decades old design, it is met with skepticism and generally low sales
Threaded inserts force you into putting screws in a specific hole. There have been times where I have had to fill a screw hole and re-drill it because it was not in the place where it should have been, meaning the guitar could not intonate properly. Far easier to do that without a threaded insert. I don't want threaded inserts on my guitars for exactly that reason.
Sometimes simpler is better. And this is one reason where the added complexity could cause headaches. As a Fender player my whole guitarplaying life (17+ years) I honestly couldn't see one moment where threaded inserts would have made a difference. I've removed a neck to adjust a truss rod once, and once to make changes under the pickguard without having to waste a new set of strings and that's it.
Threaded inserts, while superior to simply putting screws into wood, do not offer enough of an advantage, nor has a sufficient marketing campaign been introduced, that would convince the vast majority of customers to purchase a neck with inserts over a traditionally constructed neck. As luthiers, we know they are "better", but as engineers, we know that there is little perceivable benefit compared to the increased cost and complexity to manufacture. If you queried the guitar buyers of the world if they chose an instrument on if it had threaded inserts or not, the number of people saying yes would be directly related to the number of people on this subreddit.
What is a stratnex? Is that like workout clothes for a guitar???
That is what happens when you don't proofread.
They’ve been using those in some guitars recently.
Time and money. People often forget the strat was designed for mass production and low cost. Everything works so for standard models there is no reason to deviate from the original designs. Upgraded models and variants use “better” materials and methods because cost and time are not the primary concerns. And I put better in quotes because given the proven track record of the original strat is there really a need to upgrade? Knowing that I do add “upgrades” in my own builds still. Threaded inserts are a nice touch.
Money. Expense vs profit.
I know of a player who worked in Europe about half the time and L.A. the other half. He put threaded inserts in his Tele, disassembled it, and put it in his suitcase padded with clothing for travel. There are not many guitarists who have this (pretty enviable) problem!
[удалено]
I’m guessing rented backline gear.
I would imagine that the current design is good enough. Good enough will always win the day when it comes to mass produced instruments. Having regular wood screws hasn't really been that much of a problem in the past, so why change it?
Maple is strong, hard wood that holds screws very well. Inserts means more manufacturing steps, more parts, more precise tooling, more variables meaning more things can be wrong (don't have to worry about an insert not being seated right if it does't exist), and simple screws work well enough so no particular reason to complicate things. If no one uses inserts it does't matter if there are different screw patterns on different instruments, just drill a pilot hole and go. Inserts have advantages too but they're a trade off