# General Mandolin Topics > Vintage Instruments >  Lloyd loar f5s

## Hallmark498

How many were made? And how many are accounted for?

----------


## F5GRun

www.mandolinarchive.com

----------


## F5GRun

even better http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/...lins.pl?loarf5

----------


## Hallmark498

ok 222 accounted for, how many made?

----------


## F5GRun

Darryl? are you out there? 

He should be able to answer this.

----------


## danb

These are the ones we know about, Darryl's probably better placed to speculate. One way to do it is to count the gaps in the obvious groups of them..

----------


## Hallmark498

Counting the gaps might not be very accurate, but I get the idea. Gibson is known for doing crazy things with the numbers.

----------


## mrmando

Is Ken Culver's Loar on the list? He's the former director of the Portland Mandophonic Orchestra. Distinctive instrument that's missing the headstock scroll and has Handels in place of the original tuners.

----------


## danb

> Is Ken Culver's Loar on the list?


Possibly.. we'd need the serial to be sure though!

----------


## danb

> Counting the gaps might not be very accurate, but I get the idea. Gibson is known for doing crazy things with the numbers.


yes, but there are some obvious batches with a few gaps in them.. such that you could pretty safely say "at least this many" from gaps in the record.

----------


## f5loar

Filling in the gaps will get you pretty darn close. Doubtful there are any other date batches out there and if there are they would be one offs. 
The important question should be not how many were made but how many survived to today. When you factor in those lost to fire/flood/earthquake/thrown in trash cause they didn't know what it was or because it was busted(aka:PeeWee Lambert)/beat over the head of an unfaithful spouse/Converted H5s to F5s/unrepairable firepoker damage/etc. there are few unfound to date. 
Also keep in mind the archives only has those recorded as reported either by being found or by their owners. Many have not been reported and there are those owners out there that don't have computers and would not know what the F5 Journal archives are. It's all speculation and theory through statisics.

----------


## Darryl Wolfe

The number on the left is extrapolated from batches. #The number on the right is verified. This doesn't copy from MS Excel into the MCafe very well




		ESTIMATES * see below								ACTUALS-TO DATE

399		Total Loar instruments						278		Loar Period Instruments (verified)
326		Total Loar mandolins, F						226		Mandolins, F
1		Total Loar mandolins, A						1		Mandolins, A
21		Total Loar mandolas						19		Mandolas, H
11		Total Loar mando-cellos						6		Mando-cellos, K
39		Total Loar guitars						25		Guitars, L
1		Total Loar mando-violas						1		Mando-viola

								18		1922 Dated Instruments
								114		1923 Dated Instruments
								145		1924 Dated Instruments

								20		Verified fern Loar mandolins
								18		Verified triple bound on side mandolins

								142		Post Loar instruments (verified)
								125		Mandolins, F
								2		Mandolas, H
								1		Mando-cellos, K
								15		Guitars, L (fairly recent category, hundreds were made) 


		 * The above "estimates" are based on a mathematical formula that takes into account the first and last								
		verified number within an established "batch" of instruments. #The estimates should be considered 								
		minimums since no assumptions have been made concerning the actual size of individual batches.								
		In recent years several new small #batches and dates have appeared, however, it is reasonable to								
		assume that all batches are accounted for at this time. #Therefore the estimated numbers will increase								
		only when instruments are added between batches, changing the established batch size. #It is this								
		author's opinion, after careful analysis of the batch data, that the present F5 Journal estimate is well								
		within 10 percent of the actual numbers of instruments produced. #Consequently, The F5 Journal estimates								
		total Loar signed instrument production to be around 400, with mandolins accounting for about 320.

----------


## woodwizard

That's not very many considering. Were there any F5's that did not get signed during those few Loar years that are known? Seems I've heard the expression unsigned Loar before.

----------


## Darryl Wolfe

The numbers reflect those one or two unsigned mandolins that fall into the Loar signed serialized group. The other so-called unsigned Loars are simply post-Loar but look like a Loar

----------


## kudzugypsy

i've always thought that was a pretty strong number of F5's produced in a short 2 year period - 250 F5's at $275 in 1923 was a big leap of confidence for Gibson. i'm sure their goal was to produce enough to get into the hands of players and thus drive demand, so in a way, who knows how many actually went to paying buyers and how many were salesman samples that were sent to mandolin orchestras around the country - i remember David McLaughlin saying his Loar was originally a salesman sample. you see a lot of Loar era leftovers appearing on into the early 30's - as if some of these salesman samples were later sold.
even today, i bet there arent that many MMs being made per year in Nashville.

----------


## sgarrity

That is definitely some serious production. I'd venture to guess that Gibson today isn't making more that 20-30 MM a year. That's purely a guess though

----------


## Glassweb

> I've always thought that was a pretty strong number of F5's produced in a short 2 year period - 250 F5's at $275 in 1923 was a big leap of confidence for Gibson.


Seems like a lot to me too... but then again, Gibson was quite skilled at turning out huge numbers of high-quality mandolins even before Loar came on the scene. Granted, an F5 probably takes more work to put together than an F4, but how many more hours of labor would that be? Any builders out there have the answer on this?

----------


## ellisppi

In 1916 & 1917 (peak mando prod)they built about 5000 mandos/yr both yrs. I would easily guess 500 F-4's/yr both yrs. WW1 had a big impact as some very skilled mandolin makers never returned to Gibson after the war, probably because their jobs weren't there anymore. Bringing Loar in and trying to resurrect the dying mandolin was a last gasp effort and it was unsuccessful, however, the production dept. had lots of capacity and building 150 F-5's/yr, they wouldn't even break a sweat. My opinion (which all of this is) is that an F-5 doesn't take much longer to build than an F-4, the big difference is the finish which takes MUCH longer, and that is why as soon as Loar was fired Christmas eve 24, Gibson immediately went to a sprayed sunburst and lacquer finish which was much faster to apply. Because an oil varnish/french polish finish takes 6-8 weeks to do, there was one last batch of Loars hanging in the drying room over the Christmas holidays and this is the Jan 4th 25 batch, these are the unsigned, unclean, unblessed ones YFI

----------


## ellisppi

Oh yea, and I've at least heard of 4 Loars that are not on the list and won't ever be cause the owners don't want them to be.

----------


## Darryl Wolfe

I absolutely agree with Tom on both posts.

----------


## f5loar

Agree also but I think the number of known Loars by various indivduals that know they are not on the list is several dozen or more. I've heard of others say the same thing that they know where they are but owners do not want on the list. Unlike the original owners now dwindling in number as they die off and the family sells the family Loar, these private owners are too young to see their collections change hands so it may be a while on those. The jury is still out on whether you are safer and better off to be on the list vs. keeping it private until death you do part.

----------


## Glassweb

Thanks to Tom E, Tom I and DW for your/their insights. I still can't figure out why a Loar owner wouldn't want his/her mandolin listed in the archives. The listing of a serial number wouldn't pose any risk to an anonymous owner. Ah well... so be it...

----------


## Joel Spaulding

> Thanks to Tom E, Tom I and DW for your/their insights. I still can't figure out why a Loar owner wouldn't want his/her mandolin listed in the archives. The listing of a serial number wouldn't pose any risk to an anonymous owner. Ah well... so be it...


Was wondering the same thing - no info on the archive that indicates location or ownership -  

But to each his own.

----------


## Red Henry

An eminent picker I know believes that there may easily have been as many as 500 Loar-signed F-5's made, and he's played well over a hundred of them. If we consider how many of them may have gone into the trash between the 1930s and the 1970s, either in one piece or after gradually disintegrating in someone's hot attic or damp basement, I believe that it's fortunate that (something like) 250 or so may survive today.

Wasn't there a '22 F-5 in the Stanley Brothers band which was discarded in the 1950s because of a broken neck (but fortunately rescued)? For decades, it may have been considered impracticably difficult to find people who could repair such an instrument, and scarcely worth the cost of repair. I wonder how many other Loars went to the landfill-- 

Red

----------


## Glassweb

> I wonder how many other Loars went to the landfill - Red


Not too many I hope... they were, after all, expensive in their day (kinda like now) and highly regarded as instruments.
Then again, a lot can happen to an instrument in 85 years!

----------


## evanreilly

That was Pee Wee Lambert's Loar that had the neck repaired with a spoon!
I think it was hauled out of the trash bin.

----------


## f5loar

I can think of at least 2 Loars in the mid 80's that came near to being trash can material..... that is until Gibson stepped in and put them back together again. Most "woman scorned" cases are not able to Gibson to put them back together for free. There are a lot of Loars in the Calif. area and there are also a lot of fires/earthquakes out there too. Mid eastern states have lots of Loars too and they have a fair share of floods too. I'd say there are more lost to those elements then you would think. Remember when Tony Rice's guitar barely survived a flood? I know of at least 2 Loars revived back to life after water damage. How many were not? But leave it to PeeWee to get lucky!

----------


## Bill Halsey

Quote (ellisppi @ Aug. 20 2008, 12:31)
"...Because an oil varnish/french polish finish takes 6-8 weeks to do..."


Tom, I agree with most of your posting. However, with due respect, your estimate of time required to complete the finish on a Loar seems a bit on the high side. Is it really that different from the 'teens Gibsons? The F-5s may have been varnished a little more carefully (fewer sags and drips), but about the only consistent difference I notice is how much French polish they may have piled on. I can lay on a fairly convincing replication of these finishes in about a week, and most of that is drying time. I spend perhaps an hour total for varnishing & sanding, and a couple or three more hours for building up a good coat of French polish.

Perhaps F/P over oil varnish _should_ have taken longer, but the different degrees and patterns of craquelage tell me that they pushed the varnish drying time, perhaps used extra metallic dryers, and that there was little allowance for winter/summer, humid/dry conditions, as well as age of shellac, etc. We see the same characteristics on the 'teens instruments, as well.

Thoughts on this, anyone?

----------


## Ken Waltham

Well, I am certainly no luthier, but have owned many, many teens and twenties oval holes, and eight signed Loar F5's.
I have never really saw this huge difference in finish that everyone talks about. They seem a lot the same to me. Except the colour, of course, and more careful, yes, I'd say so.
I've had about 5 really, really minty Loar period F4's, and they look a lot like any Loar signed F5 I've seen. I have a really clean F5 right now, and I think the finishes are really close between an F4 of the period and this.
A lot of urban myth is generated by folks on these, the finest of mandolins, I think.
They were, after all, factory instruments.
They just happened to get every detail right, were the first of their kind, and influenced every mandolin that came after. Hhhhmmm... not bad.

----------


## Red Henry

> ok 222 accounted for, how many made?


As I recall, David McLaughlin says he has played about hundred Loars, and believes that between four and five hundred of them must have been produced.

Red

----------

