'78 Sunburst on the bay

[santellavision]

Anybody here snag this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1978-Hamer-Sunburst-/191961794195?&autorefresh=true

[kizanski]

Went cheap. 

[ARM OF HAMER]

9 minutes ago, kizanski said:

Went cheap. 

                                                         Yes it sure did...................very cool guitar! someone lucked out on that one!

[Andrew]

Wow! Right on the change over from long to short headstock, around 8 0380. Does it look like a long heastock? Should be.

The darkbursted top is nice - but the overall condition isn't so great, which is probably why it went quite cheap.

[kizanski]

1 hour ago, Andrew said:

..the overall condition isn't so great, which is probably why it went quite cheap.

We've seen a lot worse go for a lot more.
Personally, I stayed off of it because of the original shimmed bridge.
Never liked those things. Looks like a last minute screw-up fix.

[bubs_42]

Non original Case, Knobs, I question the pickups, tip and I did not hear back about the pots. $1500 for a Dot is pushing the upper limits. I bid in at the last minute but not deep enough. 

[santellavision]

I'm right with ya. It was just too beat up for me too. And, needed a re-fret really bad. I had my finger on the bid button, but couldn't pull the trigger. The kicker was the guy never messaged me back about my questions. Not good.

 

[Hamer Dave]

What I would have expected, given the condition, and frets are deep concern. I do like a worn (hopefully not beat) guitar.  Due to pricing, you can play it, and the many stories/experiences it can tell. If it was played a lot, it's likely a good one, and well enjoyed for a reason. If beat, I enjoy working on them, to be good playing guitars. 

Seen crazy pricing past couple years on some that are obviously being acquired on the cheap, and being flipped for hopes of quick $'s. Great for them if they succeed. 

[Hamer Dave]

6 hours ago, Andrew said:

Wow! Right on the change over from long to short headstock, around 8 0380. Does it look like a long heastock? Should be.

The darkbursted top is nice - but the overall condition isn't so great, which is probably why it went quite cheap.

Andrew, were there transitional profiles (I.E. Dean)? I'd like to think so, but haven't formally investigated to confirm. I like to see the first pair of tuners above the TRC on early ones. And, I want to say I've seen some, more above than others? 

Dave

[Dana_V]

3 hours ago, Hamer Dave said:

Andrew, were there transitional profiles (I.E. Dean)? I'd like to think so, but haven't formally investigated to confirm. I like to see the first pair of tuners above the TRC on early ones. And, I want to say I've seen some, more above than others? 

Dave

 

3 hours ago, Hamer Dave said:

Andrew, were there transitional profiles (I.E. Dean)? I'd like to think so, but haven't formally investigated to confirm. I like to see the first pair of tuners above the TRC on early ones. And, I want to say I've seen some, more above than others? 

Dave

I know there are those here who can pinpoint the exact crossover number for the long/short headstock, but since the guitar in the OP is 7 digits away from mine, I got kind of curious about it myself.

 

Here’s the headstock of the listing, 8 0376:

 

Here’s my dot-neck/shim-bridge Sunburst, 8 0383. Apart from one being more beat up than the other, they're identical.

 

And this is from an old Reverb listing I found, when someone was selling 8 0275 – considerably earlier serial number and noticeably longer headstock.

[Hamer Dave]

10 hours ago, Dana_V said:

 

I know there are those here who can pinpoint the exact crossover number for the long/short headstock, but since the guitar in the OP is 7 digits away from mine, I got kind of curious about it myself.

 

 

 

Here’s the headstock of the listing, 8 0376:

 

 

 

 

Here’s my dot-neck/shim-bridge Sunburst, 8 0383. Apart from one being more beat up than the other, they're identical.

 

 

 

And this is from an old Reverb listing I found, when someone was selling 8 0275 – considerably earlier serial number and noticeably longer headstock.

 

Yes! Exactly. That's the image I've  in my head. I love those. 👍

[Andrew]

I stand corrected!

Eyes (brains, more likely) weren't functioning well at the time - it is a shorter headstock.

Because the woodworking was done by Tom Holmes… who knows what intermediates were tried and discarded? As for the changeover - I vaguely remember a guitar in the 370-379 range with a longer headstock… 8 0372 with the DA headstock.