#1
Ok, so here are some pictures of the 2013 Firebird V I purchased about three weeks ago. They are close ups of the areas I think are problems. From the orange peel finish on the head stock to the rippled\bubbled looking finish at the seams and at the point where the fingerboard meets the body.

From a distance they don't appear as obvious but I bought it not only to play, but hope that it will also appreciate in value over the years assuming I take care of it properly. If I had to sell it (hoping that won't be the case) I'd like to know these issues wouldn't affect resale value.

I was flamed to the point where I just deleted the previous thread where I mentioned Gibson's lack of quality control, at least as affects this specific instrument, until I had some pictures to post. Here are the pictures. Is this a quality control issue or just my imagination? If you spent $1,700 on a Gibson Firebird V guitar that looked like this would you keep it?

Anyone else own a Firebird V made within the last two years that looks like this on the head stock and at the seams shown below? Just curious as to whether I ordered another one would I get the same quality as I now possess or something better. (I did change the knobs on it. They normally come with blacks knobs and chrome inserts.)













Last edited by David Stein at May 29, 2013,
#2
If it really bothers you and you can still return it i would just take it back to the store and swap it out for another firebird. I was at GC a few days ago and they had 3 2013 birds that i got to play and didn't notice any issues with the finish like bubbling so it might just be that guitar. As far a resale it might affect it a bit but it would depend on the person you sell it to.
ESP E-II Horizon FR
Gibson Flying V HET SET
ESP Eclipse II FM JB/Jazz
ESP M-II Deluxe EMG 81/SA
Marshall JCM2000 DSL/ JCM800 1960a cab
Tama Drums/ Sabian
#3
Quote by ltdguy27
If it really bothers you and you can still return it i would just take it back to the store and swap it out for another firebird. I was at GC a few days ago and they had 3 2013 birds that i got to play and didn't notice any issues with the finish like bubbling so it might just be that guitar. As far a resale it might affect it a bit but it would depend on the person you sell it to.
I had ordered a used Firebird V that had arrived with a cracked head stock from the tip to the second tuner. Passed on it and for about $100 more got this new one. However, I went by the store the other day to look at that 2010 made Firebird V and didn't see what I'm seeing on this 2013 model.

I'm asking what others think about this guitar if they owned it and what they would do. Thanks for your reply.

By the way, are you a Navy Corpsman or former Corpsman? Former FMF Corpsman here.
Last edited by David Stein at May 29, 2013,
#4
Quote by David Stein
I had ordered a used Firebird V that had arrived with a cracked head stock from the tip to the second tuner. Passed on it and for about $100 more got this new one. However, I went by the store the other day to look at that 2010 made Firebird V and didn't see what I'm seeing on this 2013 model.

I'm asking what others think about this guitar if they owned it and what they would do. Thanks for your reply.

By the way, are you a Navy Corpsman or former Corpsman? Former FMF Corpsman here.


Ouch sucks about the cracked head stock! If the 2010 model didn't have it i would try to get it but im not sure if the 2010's have the Steinberger gearless tuners or the old banjo tuners. Also yes im a current 8404 so Oorah Devil Docs!
ESP E-II Horizon FR
Gibson Flying V HET SET
ESP Eclipse II FM JB/Jazz
ESP M-II Deluxe EMG 81/SA
Marshall JCM2000 DSL/ JCM800 1960a cab
Tama Drums/ Sabian
#5
Quote by ltdguy27
Ouch sucks about the cracked head stock! If the 2010 model didn't have it i would try to get it but im not sure if the 2010's have the Steinberger gearless tuners or the old banjo tuners. Also yes im a current 8404 so Oorah Devil Docs!
As I understand it, all of the Firebird Vs made from 2010 on are considered "2010 model Firebirds" as it was then that Gibson changed the tuners. So yes, the used one had the newer tuners that I prefer since the guitar is now balanced as opposed to the older banjo style with its notorious neck dive. Had a 1991 Firebird V Reissue that I wish I hadn't sold, but hit hard times in the mid 90s. Had banjo tuners and neck dive but it was a beauty.

The purpose of this thread is to seek the opinions of others on the quality of the Firebird I currently own. Are these aesthetic issues something that others find acceptable in a $1,700 guitar? What would they do in the same situation? If this is the best that Gibson has to offer then I'll likely keep it as I do want a Firebird, this one is new, and it's a known quantity for the most part. Firebirds are my favorite guitar. However, I will not be completely happy with the instrument in terms of its appearance and can't believe this is the best Gibson has to offer in an instrument of that price. I just hope its appearance doesn't represent some underlying build issue that has yet to manifest itself.

I was stationed at Camp Lejeune and am one of the one million men, women, and children who were poisoned through the drinking water while stationed at Camp Lejeune from 1953 through 1988. If you're at Lejeune now DON'T DRINK THE WATER OUT OF THE TAP. It's still poisoned as they found some eight pounds of liquid mercury in the pipes less than six months ago. Try and drink bottled water when you can. That is if you're at Lejeune.
Last edited by David Stein at May 29, 2013,
#6
Haven't we had this thread before?

Return it and get another one.

It's your right as a consumer to get a guitar you are happy with.

1977 Burny FLG70
2004 EBMM JP6
2016 SE Holcolmb
#9




if you look closely at most of the new gibsons, they have this. it's the plek machine that makes those dents in the guitar body around the neck.










that is why i'd return the guitar, but i'd expect the replacement to have the chew marks in the first two photos.

good luck.
#10
Maybe try in the Les Paul forum? Not to steal you away, but you may find more comparisons. I do not collect and do not sell my guitars. I play the heck out of them and have never spend much over a grand for mine, even my Studio.

I think they can give you a "Acceptable or Not" on the quality control.

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums
#11
I agree with what others have stated, return it. Something like this is excusable on the used market provided the price takes these issues into account. For a brand new guitar though, this is in-excusable. $1700 is a lot of cash any way you cut it and for that price you deserve a guitar in new AND immaculate condition. If the store gives you any grief about it, get your money back and shop elsewhere.
AMP:
5150 combo
GSP1101 + Tech 21 PE60

GUITARS:
ESP LTD M-255 w/ SD Full Shred
Kramer Vanguard w/ JE-1000 active preamp
Douglas WF-150sn w/ GFS "Hot Lead" set

EFFECTS:
Bos SD-1 (boost)
AMT DT-2

My Youtube Vids http://youtube.com/user/mogar
#12
Sorry. On closer look it's definitely a dud.

All that flaking isn't on. Don't delete this thread, get it returned.
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#13
I think your dreaming if you think that will appreciate, but I would not accept flaws in a $1700 guitar. Return it.
SMILE!
#14
What's this about not drinking the tap water???
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#15
Quote by David Stein
The purpose of this thread is to seek the opinions of others on the quality of the Firebird I currently own. Are these aesthetic issues something that others find acceptable in a $1,700 guitar? What would they do in the same situation? If this is the best that Gibson has to offer then I'll likely keep it as I do want a Firebird, this one is new, and it's a known quantity for the most part. Firebirds are my favorite guitar. However, I will not be completely happy with the instrument in terms of its appearance and can't believe this is the best Gibson has to offer in an instrument of that price. I just hope its appearance doesn't represent some underlying build issue that has yet to manifest itself.


I would not find this acceptable on any guitar over $500, but I guess I've just been lucky enough to not deal with these kinds of issues on more expensive guitars. Though I do not currently own a Gibson, I've not seen these kinds of issues onGibsons I have owned - including a Firebird I no longer have.

I would take it back, and given your past experiences, maybe give it one more shot on landing one that's up to snuff in quality. After that, if the next one is shoddy, I'd look for another route, maybe used if that's at all interesting to you. You can't judge a company by a few duds, but it can turn you off to them if you have enough issues, and that much would be totally understandable.

Hope you get it worked out.
OffsetOffset