Stewmac f5 top/back question

[bulldog]

I recently noticed this. I have a F5 kit from StewMac. I made a mold based on the plans that came with the kit (Macrostie) but just noticed that the pre-cut top and back do not line up with the plans. #At first I thought it was me, but upon calling StewMac was told that they know about it and are tweaking the kit. #To complicate the issue even further, I made a few tops/backs based on the StewMac pre-cut top/back. So now I need to figure out, how do I come up with a body/rim to use for these tops/backs? Trace the StewMac kit pre-made rim/body set that came with the kit? Would it still be close to a typical F5? #Any thoughts? Anyone else come across this? Am I nuts?

[Bernie Daniel]

bulldog: At first I thought it was me, but upon calling StewMac was told that they know about it and are tweaking the kit.

So doesn't StewMac owe you a refund and some compensation for the tops and backs that you made off their faulty (they admit?) plans?

Maybe it would help some of the more experienced luthiers on this site if you could post an image of the mismatch?

Funny this morning I was strongly considering ordering one of their kits a whole mess of tools! #I guess I'll wait a few days?

[Antlurz]

As long as the top and back are shaped the same, I'd just use them to make the pattern with. All those high priced F5 mandolins are NOT shaped the same. I'd probably trust the tops to be right and run with it.

That's assuming they are at their final size.

How much difference is there between them and the plans?

Ron

[Stephanie Reiser]

Is the rim smaller/narrower than the plates?
or, are the plates coming in short of the rim?
If the plates have extra wood around the edges, can't you just revise the plates to fit the rim? If the rims are complete on that outfit, can't you just make a cardboard outline instead of an entire mold?

[Desert Rose]

Is different the same as faulty

Thats a bit of a stretch I think

Id say its a simple case of learning an important lesson

Check twice, cut once

Scott

[Bernie Daniel]

Desert Rose: #Is different the same as faulty
Thats a bit of a stretch I think

Why is fault a stretch? #If you are buy a kit wherein there is error or mismatch in the patterns and/or measurements and then find out that the the maker of the kit is going to tweak it (nice word for fix?) then yes, the kit is "faulty" at least as currently presented. #

I did not say it was a fatally flawed kit. #But it seems logical to me that if the kit was OK StewMac would not be "tweaking" it?

[bulldog]

Im not looking for anything other than a way to make it work. Of course, I have to take blame for it, if I checked first to ensure that everything would fit instead of "assuming" it would, I wouldnt be in this situation. To answer some questions though, the width of the body seems OK but the trouble comes in at the points. The premade top/back is not final size, so there is some meat to play with, but, the points dont line up. I have the Siminoff plans and although not exact, the top/back seem to line up better with that. #Im considering just making a tracing of the pre-assembled kit body and making a mold from that. As a newbie to this, I always assume its me first, but I dont think that applies here. A luthier friend of mine had a mold he made from the StewMac plans from a few years back. I tried to fit the kit body in that but it didnt fit there either. Other than this, I have to say that I was very impressed with the quality of StewMacs parts. and they are very nice to deal with.

[bulldog]

One more reply, Stephanie suggested a cardboard mold. That is what is used/suggested for the kit but I was hoping to make something more stable, and re-useable then the cardboard.

[Stephanie Reiser]

If you see yourself building more mandos in the future, then sure, it would certainly be worth it to build a more permanent mould for yourself other than cardboard.
Also, Macrostie's (S-M) and Siminoff's plans are not very much alike. And I don't suppose that they need to be, either. I don't have enough knowledge to suggest which of those plans are the most "accurate" or more Loar-like. I don't care for the S-M headstock but do like their body outline. I plan to build a new mould for my next litter of instruments based on Hogo's Loar plans.

[Antlurz]

I don't have enough knowledge to suggest which of those plans are the most "accurate" or more Loar-like.

Both of those plans are taken off of actual Loar instruments, so they are both accurate.

They are also both different.

Handmade mandolins are always different from each other to varying degrees. The Loar instruments these plans were taken from are no exception. They are accurate, yet they are different.

It's just that simple.

Ron

[Desert Rose]

Mandolin 1944

Your point has more holes in it than a screen door on a submarine and its not necessary to waste bandwidth here to point it out,

Read Bulldogs own comments

By the way

tweeking is NOT the same as fixing terminal errors in any english conotation that Ive ever experienced

And blaming a company with a long and good history for the simple fact that someone cut first instead of checking is not right in any book

If you want to discuss this further contact me off list where it belongs

Scott

[dstretch]

Good call Scott.

Danny

[markishandsome]

If you bought a box of pancake mix and the instructions on the back were for tomato soup, you'd think someone had screwed up, even if it were a perfectly good recipe and perfectly good pancake mix. It's the mismatch that makes it wrong. Though I guess if the tops and sides are all pre-done, the plans were probably never meant to be used in the way bulldog has. But really, why bother including plans unless they represent what the finished product should look like?

I've taken to tracing my plates from the completed rib garland, because when it comes time to glue up, that's what needs to match. If you make both to match some template, you need to make three things match instead of two.

[bulldog]

When I spoke to StewMac I was told that the plans were for reference. I wrongly assumed that they were for the "kit" that they came with. Was it an illogical assumption on my part? I dont really think so, but, live and learn.

[Gibson A5]

bulldog, if you look at the StewMac tapes/dvd's, several times he says to use the plans to go by and even to get an extra set and cut out some of the sections to use for a templet if I'm not mistaken. It's been a while since I looked at them though.
Bill P.

[Bernie Daniel]

Desert Rose: By the way tweeking is NOT the same as fixing terminal errors in any english conotation that Ive ever experienced...



Hey, thanks for pointing that out. #But then of course I never claimed there WERE any terminal errors with the kit in the first place. #

This possibly is what lead you to the "screen door on a submarine" analogy? #Colorful but somewhat meaningless nonetheless?

[markishandsome]

I've never been on a submarine myself, do their screen doors really have more holes in them than a screen door on a house?

[Bernie Daniel]

markishandsome: .....do their screen doors really have more holes in them than a screen door on a house?

You know I really do not know -- and actually until this particular string I hadn't even considered it -- but there is apparently a small fount of knowledge about that topic around! #

But I do think this string has done one thing -- it has moved me to finally "bite the bullet" and purchase a mandolin kit from either StewMac or Internat. Violin - I'm still comparing them. #I'll do an A-model first. #There is quite a difference in the kit price of course.

[bulldog]

I received this response from StewMac reference my questions about their F5 kit and plans:
"Bob,
Don asked me to contact you to clear up any questions you may still have regarding our kit components.
The reason we “tweaked” the printed plans was to closer match an original Loar era instrument that Don had in for some work. Our plans were based on a later Gibson model and were slightly different than the highly regarded Loar designed version. With a prime example on hand to evaluate, we decided it would be a worthwhile venture to update our kit components and plans to closer match a classic model.
The plans changed first, which explains the difference between the shapes of your actual kit components when compared to the plans. We have since updated the sides, tops and backs to match the plan.
Simply tracing the cardboard insert will be too tight for your mold. If you still have the original side set that shipped with your kit, you could make your mold off of that.
We apologize for the inconvenience this seems to have caused you.
Let me know if I can provide further assistance.
Best Regards,
Erick Coleman
Technical Advisor Stewart-MacDonald"
# After speaking with Erick, StewMac went so far as to send me the "new" top/back and rim set, which will fit the form I made based on the kit plans. This being complimentary. I am extremely impressed with this company, both with their quality of parts, and, customer service. The plans now by the way, according to Erick, are based on a 1924 Loar. I would not hesitate in buying one again, especially this "improved" version.