1986 charvel model 4

[zepplin490]

Ive got a charvel 1986 model 4 and Im wondering what its worth according to the luthier i had do the refurbishment it was all original parts and I had him make up the missing truss rod cover and the trem cavity cover.. the neck is a little bigger than im used to from newer charvels,jacksons and Ibanez's that i own but it still shreds and the finish is flawless...
thanks
-mp-

 

[Shawn Lutz]

I don't think that is a model 4, that is not a Charvel body and the dots are way too far apart for the neck to be a Charvel. They also didnt recess the trem route in 86. It looks like a parts caster refinished and a Charvel logo added

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think that is a model 4, that is not a Charvel body and the dots are way too far apart for the neck to be a Charvel. They also didnt recess the trem route in 86. It looks like a parts caster refinished and a Charvel logo added

Yup, definitely. So, it isn't worth much...

Steve

 

[zepplin490]

F*ck, not to dispute but were those pickup selectors ever used on any other guitars? Ive only seen them on model 4's. Also if its a partsocaster were there neck through parts like this available?
-mp-

 

[zepplin490]

No biggie if its not real, I Traded a pod xt pro for it and its a killer playing and sounding axe.
-mp-

 

[Shawn Lutz]

I don't think I ever saw a Model 4 with 3 minis. I have seen them on USA Charvels and Jacksons. I have a Bound Jackson strat with that config.

 

[Chris6870]

Kinda looks like a Kramer body and they did use mini toggles.

 

[Anonymous]

F*ck, not to dispute but were those pickup selectors ever used on any other guitars? Ive only seen them on model 4's. Also if its a partsocaster were there neck through parts like this available?
-mp-

I've seen several Charvel Model 4 guitars with three mini toggles... but yours are too close together and in the wrong place. On USA Charvels and Jacksons, they used them all the time as well... Dunno where the neck through parts came from, but the 12th fret dots are too far apart - no way is that Charvel...

Here's one:

As far as I know, the Model 4 guitars were all bolt on - are you saying this is a neck through? That is also not a legit Japanese Charvel logo either - look at the picture I posted - the logo has writing underneath it and yours doesn't. Does it have 6 inline or three per side tuners on your logo? Looks like 3 on a side, which would be USA, which would indicate fake...

Steve

 

[Enjolras56]

Yeah, I concur. I own a Model 5 from that era.
Glad you enjoy it as a player though, which is what it's about, right?

The body on yours looks way different especially the lower horn/cutaway.
And did you mean that yours is a neck-thru? Models 4's were bolt-on.
Also, is that an Original Floyd or licensed on there? The Charvels came with either a Kahler or a Jackson licensed Floyd, which didn't have the original Floyd-style fine tuners.
I'm pretty sure they all came with the Jackson covered pickups live the one Steve posted.

Here is a pretty good resource on the Japanese Charvels
http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/charvel-japan-import-guitars.php

 

[ConcreteVampire]

My model 4 had 3 mini toggles
Black Active Jackson covered pickups
Kahler

 

[zepplin490]

Yeah its neck through and has a jackson licensed trem.
=mp-

 

[ronjhoser]

The Floyd nut is a deal breaker. All of the Charvels of the era had a separate nut and string lock.

 

[Chris6870]

You know it may not be a Model 4 but still may be a Charvel. Can you find any serial #? Maybe on the end of fretboard. Charvel made a slew of imported models in every configuration you can imagine on through the mid 90's.Take a look at this site and see if you can match it up-
http://www.charvelusa.com/photos.html

 

[Chris6870]

The Floyd nut is a deal breaker. All of the Charvels of the era had a separate nut and string lock.

Starting the early 90's they went to the regular floyd nut.

 

[Anonymous]

The Floyd nut is a deal breaker. All of the Charvels of the era had a separate nut and string lock.

Starting the early 90's they went to the regular floyd nut.

Look at the Model 4 picture I posted above. 1987 with a regular Floyd nut.

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

You know it may not be a Model 4 but still may be a Charvel. Can you find any serial #? Maybe on the end of fretboard. Charvel made a slew of imported models in every configuration you can imagine on through the mid 90's.Take a look at this site and see if you can match it up-
http://www.charvelusa.com/photos.html

I don't think so. That body is not right for a Charvel, logo is wrong. Too many incorrect features for it to be a Charvel.

Steve

 

[rupe]

100% positive that it's not a Charvel. As mentioned, it has far too many easy "tells"...Model 4 was a bolt-on, wrong logo, wrong dot spacing, etc. The first commercially available recessed trem was the Jem in '87 which would make this newer than that.

Do you have a pic of the back? The control cavity rout could offer some clues.

 

[zepplin490]

rupe ill have to open up the cavity the cover for the cavity was one of the pieces that was missing when i got the guitar (along with the truss ros cover) Ill snap some pic's later today and post em... This makes me very curious as clearly from the expert knowledge this is not an 86' model 4, And the lack of the extra script under the charvel most defiantly means its not a charvel as does the neck through construction but somebody went to some lengths to make it appear as a charvel. Its defiantly an above average instrument IMHO even with the little extra girth on the neck it is still very comfortable in my jackson, ibanez and "real" charvel spoiled hands, I also forgot to mention that it has a set of duncan single coils and a duncan humbucker in the back which i was always a little suspicious of but even if i get $200-$300 sometime in the future ill be happy im gonna hand onto it for a while i think purely because of its tone, playablity and it being 1 of only 2 guitars i own that have passive pickups in it.
thanks for all the help guys
-mp-

 

[Anonymous]

rupe ill have to open up the cavity the cover for the cavity was one of the pieces that was missing when i got the guitar (along with the truss ros cover) Ill snap some pic's later today and post em... This makes me very curious as clearly from the expert knowledge this is not an 86' model 4, And the lack of the extra script under the charvel most defiantly means its not a charvel as does the neck through construction but somebody went to some lengths to make it appear as a charvel. Its defiantly an above average instrument IMHO even with the little extra girth on the neck it is still very comfortable in my jackson, ibanez and "real" charvel spoiled hands, I also forgot to mention that it has a set of duncan single coils and a duncan humbucker in the back which i was always a little suspicious of but even if i get $200-$300 sometime in the future ill be happy im gonna hand onto it for a while i think purely because of its tone, playablity and it being 1 of only 2 guitars i own that have passive pickups in it.
thanks for all the help guys
-mp-

Hey man, if you dig it, who cares whether it's a Charvel or not? If it sounds good, looks good and plays good, it IS good!

Steve

 

[///MK]

FWIW a 1986 model 4 had a Khaler not the licenced floyd JT6 .
Not a model 4 or charvel..