Thoughts or Feedback on BFR Cutlass/Stingray Binding

Thoughts or Feedback on BFR Cutlass/Stingray Binding

Just curious if anyone else had a similar experience or feedback related to the binding on a BFR Cutlass & Stingray.

A year or two back I picked up a Stingray and Cutlass second-hand and I love them. A few months ago I decided a perfectly responsible and reasonable financial decision was to pick up their BFR counterparts (Scarlet Red & Smoke White). They are lovely guitars and sound tip-top but I can’t jive with the neck binding feel. To me – the mojo of the RS Stingray/Cutlass are the neck profiles and fit, but the BFR binding seems to disrupt that.

In the case of the Cutlass – I measured with calipers to compare the `RS` vs. `BFR` and found the nut width and neck thicknesses were (practically) the same. There was a perceived width increase on the BFR, but I think that came from the binding providing a sharp/squared fretboard edge as opposed to a more radiused edge on the RS counterpart.

In the case of the Stingray – the BFR nut-width is slightly wider per the spec sheet and also has the sharp/squared edge.

I tried to live with them but I found it quite uncomfortable to play thumb-over chords and many chord embellishments. However, playability is the main-thing and that’s always most important to me. By contrast, my Valentine feels very comfortable and seamless with the binding.

It stinks because I’m a sucker for bound necks, block inlays, and/or matching headstocks but I ended up parting with the BFRs and going back to the standard-runs. Just posting to see if anyone else ran into this or if there are certain Cutlass/Stingray BFR runs with more inconspicuous binding I should keep an eye out for in the future.

read more