In another thread somebody mentioned fat necks on a PRS 245, and

Roberto

Senior Member
Messages
654
called it a baseball bat type neck. That neck, though, at least on my 245, is small compared to a 2113 Les Paul Traditional that I have. That's the fattest neck I ever had on a guitar, but I kind of like it, though I generally like small necks.

Speaking of thin necks, back in the day, Mosrite guitars had tiny little necks. I liked them when I was a teenager. I may or may not like em that small these days, but I sure wish I had one to see.
 

joesnewmatch

Music Is My Soul Food
Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,546
My Sunburst 245 from the all-nitro run has a pretty fat neck, without being unwieldy. In comparison, my Les Paul Classic from the 90s has a crazy thin neck.
 

Roberto

Senior Member
Messages
654
My Sunburst 245 from the all-nitro run has a pretty fat neck, without being unwieldy. In comparison, my Les Paul Classic from the 90s has a crazy thin neck.
yeah. I had a LP Classic that was pretty thin. Evidently not as thin as yours, but thin. I liked it. I have a Standard that is a 60's neck not as quite as thin as that Classic was, and I think I like it a little better.
 

dazco

Member
Messages
15,059
PRS wide/fat necks don't seem as fat because they are wider than most necks. The ratio of width to depth makes it SEEM thinner than it is.
 

AaeCee

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
18,583
PRS W/F necks are pleasingly fat but not baseball bat fat, however their original Santana necks were huge.
 

Kelsey

Member
Messages
2,257
They are wide (as in 1 11/16" nut width, like Gibson and Fender's modern C), and they are borderline chunky - my W/F McCarty Std measured 0.86" at the 1st and 0.96" at the 12th fret. My later NF3 with pattern regular measured 0.83" to 0.93". They're both gone now. My G&L Legacy runs 0.83" to 0.96" and feels chunkier with it's 1 5/8" nut width - that's the smallest neck I own now. The others (Fender CS, LSL, and Gibson) run at least 0.88" to at least 0.98" from 1st to 12th.
 

Mandrax

Member
Messages
1,602
The whole wide/fat thing is misleading. They are the same width at the nut and same width at the last fret as most of my other guitars. They aren't particularly fat either. Nowhere near what I would call a 'baseball bat', not even as fat as many 50s profile Les Pauls. That said, I like the WF (or Pattern as they are called now), it fits my hand perfectly.

Just for info, both my PRS have 22 frets, I don't know if a 24 fret is slightly fatter at the last last fret, could be I guess.
 

axe4me

Member
Messages
4,132
My Lonnie Mack V and Historic '57 LP Custom have the fattest necks I've ever played.
They're fun.
 

jimmyj

Member
Messages
5,555
A few times a friend of mine who plays a Historic R9 have gigged together. We were able to make direct comparisons between his R9 and my PRS Ted McCarty sc245. The 2 necks had almost an identical profile but PRS has bigger frets.
 

jiml

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
11,167
I had a late 90's R7 that had an unplayably fat neck, skinny frets didn't help either.
 

Tone_Terrific

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
34,039
The W/F designation can only be applied vis a vis other PRS options as the measurements indicate that they are not particularly wide nor fat vs what is available as replacement necks or general perception.
However, feel is a big YMMV.
 

dazco

Member
Messages
15,059
The whole wide/fat thing is misleading. They are the same width at the nut and same width at the last fret as most of my other guitars.
I dunno what guitars you have, but i've measured mine with a very accurate digital caliper and my SE is wider at both nut and end than any of my guitars which are all common models, LP, strat, tele. Note that it's a small difference as numbers go, but it takes very small differences on a neck to feel very different. I think the width of a 1 oversize nut width is 1/16" more than standard. yet it feels much wider.
 

Mandrax

Member
Messages
1,602
I dunno what guitars you have, but i've measured mine with a very accurate digital caliper and my SE is wider at both nut and end than any of my guitars which are all common models, LP, strat, tele. Note that it's a small difference as numbers go, but it takes very small differences on a neck to feel very different. I think the width of a 1 oversize nut width is 1/16" more than standard. yet it feels much wider.
Your Fender guitars are probably MiM and/or vintage specced, there is a difference in nut width, the MiM and vintage spec guitars are narrower at the nut than other USA models.

For nut width I compared my SE Singlecut and USA Custom 22 with my USA Strat and Epi Sheraton. None of them feel any wider on the fretboard though they do vary in profile so there is a difference. For measurement at the body end I measured it at it's widest point at the body end and included my Fender AV Telecaster. All 5 guitars measure 57mm at the widest point. So basically whilst there may be a slight difference at the nut end by the time you get to the heel, they are all the same.

Here are PRS official specs. You'll see the nut width is exactly the same as a modern USA Fender and almost all Gibson guitars at 1 11/16" (42.8mm) and the width at the body is 2 1/4" (57mm).

https://www.prsguitars.com/csc/neckprofiles.html
 
Last edited:

scott520

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,111
I dunno what guitars you have, but i've measured mine with a very accurate digital caliper and my SE is wider at both nut and end than any of my guitars which are all common models, LP, strat, tele. Note that it's a small difference as numbers go, but it takes very small differences on a neck to feel very different. I think the width of a 1 oversize nut width is 1/16" more than standard. yet it feels much wider.
Thats odd. I've measured all of my PRS guitars with calipers as well but came up typical numbers i.e 1 11/16 nut width. PRS' website also states those dimensions.
 






Trending Topics

Top