7ender Roadworn Precision / Classic 50s

Precison_lover · #1 11-02-2010, 04:40 AM

Dear Members,

I have a question. What are exactly the differences between a
Roadworn Precision and Classic 50s Precison bass?

Is it only the nitro lacquer and the dings and dongs or are there more differences?

Some dealers say, that the Roadworn has a lighter body and is more resonat. One told me, that the material of the frets used on a Roadworn neck is better quality than on a Classic 50s.

Do they have the same pickup?

What would you prefer to buy? Thank You.

cigi · #2 11-02-2010, 04:46 AM

The difference I noticed on the road worns vs the classic series is obviously the nitro finish and the aging. Put apart from that they all had lighter and very resonant bodies.

Some people say they don't want to pay a few 100 dollars just for the aging. Me neither, I don't care for the whole relic thing. That being said, I'm thinking now about buying a road worn jazz despite the relicing, because they are such amazing instruments. If I could buy the same without the relicing, I would. But the classic 60s reissues aren't the same without the relicing. They are nice basses, but not as good as the RW.

IMO off course.

Precison_lover · #3 11-02-2010, 05:11 AM

Thanks a lot cigi. I'll go to a dealer later on and will see what to buy. I also own a JB but it's a 70s with the big PU spacing, sounds to modern for my actual needs.

jfh2424 · #4 11-02-2010, 05:29 AM

I would suggest you play several of both before making a decision. Theoretically, it seems they are the same model minus the finishes and the scratches. But I played several of each and they did not sound the same to me. I wanted to like the Classics as I am not a fan of relics. But the RW were consistently better sounding. And often a lot lighter.

I ended up buying the RW and derelicing most of it. It was that much better than the Classics, in my opinion.

I am not alone here in thinking that these two models are not exactly the same sound wise, irrelevant of the specs.

Spend some time with both before you decide.

John

bassbully · #5 11-02-2010, 08:02 AM

FWIW I feel the 50's is a better bass for the price and looks. I hate the fake relic and even thou the necks feel good on the RW I cant see a big enough diffrence in he RW to pay more.

Floridabwoy · #6 11-02-2010, 08:05 AM

My 50's P is pretty freakin light. I think it is 8 lbs 2 oz

dvh · #7 11-02-2010, 08:25 AM

MY 50s P is heavier than any of the RW I've held... (but that thick poly must add a few oz's!)

thebisch · #8 11-02-2010, 09:16 AM

Don't the RWs have bigger frets than the classics also? In know the RW guitars have med. jumbos vs. the classics with vintage size frets. Other than that and the finish, I believe they are the same.

rnilson · #9 11-02-2010, 09:32 AM

You can see the specs on the fender site. They are the same bass with different finish. You pay more for the work it takes to relic the bass.

Sifl · #10 11-02-2010, 10:23 AM

The Roadworn P sounded great when I played it at my local shop. The neck is just too wide for me.

major10th · #11 11-02-2010, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sifl

The Roadworn P sounded great when I played it at my local shop. The neck is just too wide for me.

Yup, that's what took both of them off my list, the 1.75" width at the nut. Coming from a jazz bass (with it's 1.5" width), I'm considering only p basses with the more common 1.625" width.

Also, I don't see where the body wood is specified for either of these on fender.com.

Tusec · #12 11-02-2010, 11:22 AM

I had a Classic 60s Jazz and a Road Worn Jazz at the same and compared them closely. The finish is the most obvious difference -- poly vs lacquer, relic vs shiny-new. The RW is quite a bit lighter and there seem to be two reasons for this. The first is that the wood itself is less dense but also the body is 1/8" thinner than the Classic. I disassembled the pickups on both and my recollection is that they were the same except for the aging -- both are great sounding alnico types. The necks feel very similar with vintage frets and 7.25" radius, but the RW has some subtle rounding of the fretboard edges so it feels a little more broken in. I also noticed that the rosewood fretboard is 1/16" thicker on the RW, which makes me think they were built according to slightly different specs. Both have nice vintage style reverse tuners. I thought the RW's tort pickguard had a more vintage-correct looking color and swirl. Both are excellent basses but the RW was noticeably more alive and resonant. Mine were Jazzes but I assume most of these details would apply to Precisions too.

jfh2424 · #13 11-02-2010, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tusec

I had a Classic 60s Jazz and a Road Worn Jazz at the same and compared them closely. The finish is the most obvious difference -- poly vs lacquer, relic vs shiny-new. The RW is quite a bit lighter and there seem to be two reasons for this. The first is that the wood itself is less dense but also the body is 1/8" thinner than the Classic. I disassembled the pickups on both and my recollection is that they were the same except for the aging -- both are great sounding alnico types. The necks feel very similar with vintage frets and 7.25" radius, but the RW has some subtle rounding of the fretboard edges so it feels a little more broken in. I also noticed that the rosewood fretboard is 1/16" thicker on the RW, which makes me think they were built according to slightly different specs. Both have nice vintage style reverse tuners. I thought the RW's tort pickguard had a more vintage-correct looking color and swirl. Both are excellent basses but the RW was noticeably more alive and resonant. Mine were Jazzes but I assume most of these details would apply to Precisions too.

I would not be surprised if this was the deal with the Ps, too. It would explain the differences I heard. As well as the weight things I have noticed.

I'm not slamming the Classics. They are really cool too. If I had not heard the RW, I would have bought a Classic.

John

cigi · #14 11-02-2010, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfh2424

I would suggest you play several of both before making a decision. Theoretically, it seems they are the same model minus the finishes and the scratches.

I don't know what theory you mean, but to me that isn't even true. Although they don't advertise things like this, but fender obviously uses way better woods on these rw series. I read everywhere on this forum and have heard it in different stores and have experienced it my myself that every rw bass I played had very resonant and light woods.

I just A/Bed a RW jazz and classic series and it was a no brainer that the wood on the RW was of a way better quality and it's not just the aging that you pay, it's the overal quality of the bass.

With both RW and classis series you get a good bass for the money you pay. With the RW you pay more than with the classis series so the bass will be better.

I'm going to sleep it over, but I'll probably be heading to the shop were I tested the RW jazz this week and bring it home with me.

**StrangerDanger** · #15 11-02-2010, 03:33 PM

I have the RW P with a RW J neck and I love it. I have played the 50's Classic and I can tell you without reservation that the fit and finish and overall feel of quality of the RW is vastly superior to the Classic. The frets are vintage on both but the rolled edges and finish of the neck is much better. The body is very light and resonant. I am really happy with this bass and I was NOT into the relic thing either. Im still not, but this bass is too hot to matter. I cant really testify on the pup bc mine has the SD SPB-1. Put some LaBellas on it and roll brother.

Mrdak · #16 11-02-2010, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StrangerDanger

I have the RW P with a RW J neck and I love it. I have played the 50's Classic and I can tell you without reservation that the fit and finish and overall feel of quality of the RW is vastly superior to the Classic. The frets are vintage on both but the rolled edges and finish of the neck is much better. The body is very light and resonant. I am really happy with this bass and I was NOT into the relic thing either. Im still not, but this bass is too hot to matter. I cant really testify on the pup bc mine has the SD SPB-1. Put some LaBellas on it and roll brother.

Yeah you right.. I need to gets me one of these RW Jazzes to go with my 57P....

major10th · #17 11-02-2010, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigi

I don't know what theory you mean, but to me that isn't even true. Although they don't advertise things like this, but fender obviously uses way better woods on these rw series. I read everywhere on this forum and have heard it in different stores and have experienced it my myself that every rw bass I played had very resonant and light woods.

Yeah, I agree that it's odd that Fender says next to nothing about the body wood - instead hyping the thin nitro finish. Although I didn't see it mentioned on fender.com, I saw on a youtube vid that the body is alder. So is it the lightness of a particular alder slab that translates to to being more resonant and better sounding?

bassbully · #18 11-02-2010, 10:35 PM

What is the average price diff between the two basses...anyone?

recreate.me · #19 11-02-2010, 10:46 PM

I think it says on the fender site the Classics go for about 1000 where the RWs are about 1299... So you are paying the extra 300 for Nitro finishing and the relic and (not mentioned) better woods.

I was looking to get the Classic 50s and ended up with the RW because it does just sound and feel better. It might be that the Nitro actually does help the tone or perhaps they use better wood, but the RW just felt and sounded better! I bought one used here on TB (i think a fiesta red P is still for sale) and saved a bunch of money over the new price from the store, so it sealed it for me!

Jasisco · #20 11-02-2010, 11:41 PM

I've had my RW Jazz for a little over a year, by far the best Jazz bass i've played. On the rare gig i'll need to use a P-bass but this is my number 1 workhorse.. Here's an example of it at work doing the spanish stuff in one of the bands i gig with..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boG_v7PaN3k