Why such a big difference in neck and body dates on this?

If the neck were newer, I'd suspect it was replaced. But here the body is newer, by six years.

http://cgi.ebay.com/USA-G-L-ASAT-III-My ... 3f046a3dde

Lots of interesting 3-pup ASATs on the 'bay right now.

I have a couple lefties with dates that are years apart, older hardware, etc. The end results were/are magnificent. I guess they don't make-um from scratch every time.


Cheers,

Will

Well there were no three bolt bodies in 99 could be an 89 body with a 93 neck, from the picks of the body it doesn't look like the two lower neck attachment holes were filled in and in 99 there also would not be a micro tilt installed in the body and of course there would also be holes to fill on the back of the body and then re painted of which I see no evidence. probably just not enough ink on that cheap little stamper they used to complete the 8 so it looks like a nine.

gary

It looks to me that the body date is 93 and not 99. If you look closely at the number, the right side of the last digit is built like a 3 and not a 9. Me says 93 for both neck and body.-- Darwin

I'm with Darwin. Look at the bottom part of the last 9 in 1999 and it's different to the one next to it, therefore is a different number, and the only other number that curves like that at the bottom is a 3. Looks like the ink smudged.

I'm with Darwin. Look at the bottom part of the last 9 in 1999 and it's different to the one next to it, therefore is a different number, and the only other number that curves like that at the bottom is a 3. Looks like the ink smudged.

I agree with Darwin and blargfromouterspace.