Guitar Parts Percentage Question:

Inspector #20

Inspector #20

Ambassador of Tone
Fallen Star
Country flag
This is a very interesting subject to me, so i wanted to open up some discussion on the matter.

I saw a Fender drawing, in an old employee handbook, that said they considered the body worth 40% of the guitar's completed value, another 40% for the neck and 20% to hardware.

Do you guys agree or disagree with this and upon what do you base any alternative computations???

ALL-Guitar-Parts-Diagram.jpg
 
For something like a Gibson I think I would agree. Especially considering the construction and finishing methods used.

For a bolt-neck? Mabe not - they are basically widgets other than the necks (nut and frets at least) so I don't think I would give the bodies so much credit. I also think bolt-neck guitars are grotesquely overpriced for what they are but that's a different conversation.
 
Well it depends…:unsure:

For the sake of discussion if I’m doing a nice Warmoth build the neck is more than the body. Add the pups to the body and good tuners to the neck and you’re about even. I wouldn’t break out the hardware, just add it to the body or neck. IMHO they are about 50/50 in value.


So, the real tie breaker question is…

do the strings belong to the body or the neck ? :rolf:
 
Don O said:
Well it depends…:unsure:

For the sake of discussion if I’m doing a nice Warmoth build the neck is more than the body. Add the pups to the body and good tuners to the neck and you’re about even. I wouldn’t break out the hardware, just add it to the body or neck. IMHO they are about 50/50 in value.


So, the real tie breaker question is…

do the strings belong to the body or the neck ? :rolf:
Click to expand...
Realistically, 50/50 is probably accurate. I will say in the realm of the Frankentele I’m putting together. It’s probably 75/25. The body is an ash eBay purchase. Was not expensive. The neck is a tricked out to my specs Warmoth piece. It’s no contest where most of my money went in the project.

If I factored in hardware and electronics. It’s closer to 50% neck…. 30% hardware/electronics….. and 20% body. Just a rough guess.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the body to a large extent. A regular every day Tele, for example, is basically a slab of shaped wood. A Les Paul is a mahogany body with a sculpted maple top and binding in many cases.
I would suggest the LP body would be a higher percentage of the price.

For me, I don't care. I buy full guitars rather than parts so I look at it as a total.
100% is the guitar.
 
I'd say the neck would be the least valuable of the 3 in my opinion. The body obviously would be the highest percentage of value, at least 50%

Electronics and hardware would be at least 35-40% and the neck would be 10-15%, especially if it's a bolt on. I'd go 20% if it's a set neck. A neck thru would basically just increase the body value since both are one in the same essentially, thus making up 70% of the overall value id say
 
Of course, this type of question is entirely subjective and depends on each person's valuation.

I'm assuming we're limiting the conversation to a solid-body electric guitar.

For me, I'd place the neck at 45% of value, the body at 35% and the hardware at 20%.

The reason I say this is that the neck is the part of the guitar that is truly a precision piece. True, there is some precision in the body, but this is primarily the point where the bridge mounts, to ensure correct scale length and string alignment. From that point on, just about any goofy thing can be done to the body. This is not to say the body is not important. The neck and bridge have to attach to something, and it has to be somewhat comfortable for the user. Also, the visual appeal of the guitar is mostly attributable to the body.

The neck, however, requires great attention to everything from thickness, profile, fret placement, width, and more. So, I place more value on the neck than the body.

In a real sense, with the exception of the neck, a solid-body electric guitar is just glorified furniture. I've seen coffee tables that require more craftsmanship than a solid guitar body.

The hardware and electronics are critical, to be sure, but there is a wide variability on what goes on here. You can choose to put really expensive tuners on the guitar, but you don't really have to. The same with electronics. But, they are definitely not optional, so I kept the figure at 20%
 
I think cost is a major factor to sum up percentages of the bottom line end product
I manufacture northwest coast wood carving tools the price of materials
example the wood I use for handles in 2008 was $28.00 now $150.00
the last time I sourced Brazilian rosewood it's gone crazy price wise
On Gibson guitars it's a huge up charge now
Korina Explorer with Brazilian rosewood fingerboard Custom Shop $40,000.00 one piece body
Korina Explorer Indian rosewood fingerboard Custom Shop $10,000.00 two piece body
 
67plexi said:
I think cost is a major factor to sum up percentages of the bottom line end product
I manufacture northwest coast wood carving tools the price of materials
example the wood I use for handles in 2008 was $28.00 now $150.00
the last time I sourced Brazilian rosewood it's gone crazy price wise
On Gibson guitars it's a huge up charge now
Korina Explorer with Brazilian rosewood fingerboard Custom Shop $40,000.00 one piece body
Korina Explorer Indian rosewood fingerboard Custom Shop $10,000.00 two piece body
Click to expand...
I agree. Ya can’t do percentages without the costs. If I bought a $100 Costco guitar and put $150 Schallers tuners on it, the hardware alone is more than 50%. But if I put those Schaller tuners on the $850 neck above, the percentage is a lot less. You have to start with a BOM, price it out, and then tabulate the percentages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top