Vintage D25 dating help

[Foreverstrung]

Greetings. New to this forum. Appreciate you all adding me.
move got an old Guild D25 I purchased years ago as a refurbishment project. It had been thru the ringer. Cracks, splits, a big gouge. Shrinking pickguard that created some splits. Anyways, I did all the repairs. Never totally completed the finish, but it’s a player.
tonight I started investigating it’s beginnings. When I purchased it, I was told 1970, but that’s not adding up with what I’ve uncovered online.
it has no serial number on the headstock.
the label in the sound hole says made in Hoboken. D25. Serial number OG 269.
inside on the neck heal it’s stamped OG 269…. I’ll try to attach some pics. I’d appreciate any feedback, thoughts, insight.
thx
PS, I put on these tuning machines as the original was missing a screw in one machine/cog and it would never stay in tune. G string. I still have the originals.

 

[Foreverstrung]

Sorry about the photo repeats.

 

[calvoi]

This website (http://support.guildguitars.com/downloads/datingyourguild.pdf) suggests that the OG prefix for D25 was from 68-69. But it also suggests that the last one was OG233. Perhaps your was a later model in '69? Very interesting and I am sure someone much more knowledgeable will be able to help.

 

[fronobulax]

Welcome.

Dating Guilds by serial number seems to have more exceptions than rules. In addition the published data is often incomplete or flat out wrong. There are also some cases where the serial number was assigned some time before the instrument was completed. There is also the fact that when Guild changed serial number schemes they did not always do so on Jan. 1.

That said, I would expect OG-269 to "be" 1970 primarily because the change to non-model specific serial numbers did not happen on Jan 1. I am surprised that the headstock is not stamped but have no explanation. You should note that production transitioned from Hoboken to Westerly in the late '60's but Guild continued to use Hoboken labels in Westerly guitars until the supply ran out. Your instrument was almost certainly made in Westerly.

 

[Foreverstrung]

Ya, I thought no headstock stamp was odd too. Appreciate you guys responding. Interesting stuff

 

[fronobulax]

Ya, I thought no headstock stamp was odd too. Appreciate you guys responding. Interesting stuff

I went back and noticed the pic with the serial number on the inside on the neck block. 1970 was a a time when there was a lot going on with Guild's basses. The catalog specs were not always being followed and new models and tweaks to old models were happening until things "stabilized" in 1971. If there was a sense of - "new factory, new ideas" - that applied across the product line, it is easy to imagine stenciling the serial inside because they thought it might be easier (innovation) or had misplaced the stamps in the move

 

[Br1ck]

Well, I'd guess pre 70, because my 70 D 35 has a faded decal. I can't imagine a D 25 having an inlay and a D 35 not, although logic might not prevail. Anyway, thanks for the rescue. It only needs to be solid, not pretty.

 

[wileypickett]

Dating Guilds by serial number seems to have more exceptions than rules.

If Guild ever contemplates getting rid of their "Guild: Made to Be Played" brand motto, I'd vote to replace it with "Guild: More Exceptions Than Rules."

 

[GardMan]

I would expect OG-269 to "be" 1970

Based on the inlaid headstock logo and smaller pickguard (assuming that the PG is original, or matches the original), I'd expect it to be from '69. Has the bridge been swapped? A '69 might be expected to have a thru saddle. This one is drop in, but it looks a little oversize...

If he doesn't respond to this thread, send an e-mail (thru his website) to @hansmoust. He would be able to give you a firm date. You might also use a mirror to check for a date stamp inside, on one of the braces flanking the sound hole. Don't know that Guild was stamping dates there in '69-70, but they were in spring of '71.

 

[Foreverstrung]

the PG is a replacement. When I bought this "project", I guess the original was glued directly to the wood finish. Not lacquer and with age, it shrunk and cracked the hell out of the top. I repaired with cleats and titebond and bought this replacement PG.
As far as I know, this is the original bridge

 

[SFIV1967]

Serial number OG 269.

4

She was made in 1970 in Westerly, RI (see Hans book page 47). Old Hoboken labels used until gone.

Ralf

 

[Foreverstrung]

I just reviewed emails. I had shipped the old pickguard for tracing to a guy named Tony Dunkirk, (The Pickguardian) and he made this one for me in 2016. I believe just a hair larger to cover old footprint entirely

 

[fronobulax]

Based on the inlaid headstock logo and smaller pickguard (assuming that the PG is original, or matches the original), I'd expect it to be from '69. Has the bridge been swapped? A '69 might be expected to have a thru saddle. This one is drop in, but it looks a little oversize...

If he doesn't respond to this thread, send an e-mail (thru his website) to @hansmoust. He would be able to give you a firm date. You might also use a mirror to check for a date stamp inside, on one of the braces flanking the sound hole. Don't know that Guild was stamping dates there in '69-70, but they were in spring of '71.

Why?

I'm not arguing with you as much as I am trying to figure out if you have different information or just interpret things differently.

Guild did not change specs or serial number procedures on a calendar basis. So if the last serial number for '69 is given, this serial number is greater and the specs match '69 I'm going to say and conclude that it is '70 and that the serial number charts are incorrect or incomplete because there were a few "leakers" that left in 1970 with the old serial number scheme and the '69 specs.

 

[GardMan]

Why?

Looking at the D-25 specs Hans published (p125 of his book):

Introduced in 1968 with "Black peghead overlay with inlaid 'peaked' logo."
"Slightly smaller (than standard) tortoise-style pickguard."
"1968: Serial number prefix OG."
"1969: no peghead overlay, silkscreened Guild logo. Standard pickguard shape.

So, I would have expected (and have seen many examples of) D-25s from 1970 to have a silk screened headstock logo and standard-sized pickguard. I don't think I have any any other example of a 1970 D-25 with the smaller pickguard, but smaller pickguards are commonly seen on D-25s from 1968 and 1969.

We also have seen examples where the SN charts are wrong, with instruments from a given year appearing with SN greater than the last listed in the SN charts, particularly when there is a transition in the numbering scheme, as occurred during the time period of 1969-1970. So, in this case, I go with the instruments appearance (headstock overlay and pickguard) rather than the SN.

Plus, it's been a while since I have been "Hans'd," and am just waiting for it to happen!

 

[GardMan]

After saying all that, I google searched "1970 Guild D-25" and came up with images of several dated by SN to 1970 with the smaller pickguard.

1970 Guild D25

1970 Guild D25 Serial No. 48072, Very nice D25. Great aged finish patina.Soundswonderful. Includes original case.Nut Width -1 11/16” 1st fret - . 12th fret - . Weight - lbs. oz.

jimmywallaceguitars.com

Vintage 1970 Guild D25-BR acoustic guitar- RARE All-mahogany flatback! | Reverb

Vintage 1970 Guild D25-BR (for “brown”, as opposed to “cherry”) in great playing condition. This guitar has been gone through by former Guild employee Tom Jacobs and is fully ready to roll, no issues at all.Not to be confused with the more common spruce top/laminated arched back version … This is...

reverb.com

Vintage 1970 Guild D25 Cherry Red Hoboken Label w/ Gig Bag | Reverb Australia

Vintage 1970 Guild D-25 Cherry. This is a great playing and sounding early D-25 in rare Cherry Red finish. It has a serial number that has the 60's number scheme, although the numbers fall outside the range of a 60's guitar, and a label that says Hoboken NJ, although I would specu...

reverb.com

However, ALL 3 of these 1970 instruments had the silk-screened headstock logo, in contrast to the overlay and inlaid Guild in the OP's D-25.

Also saw a pic of the underside of a top from removed from a 1970 D-35, with a date stamp in Mar 1970 on one sound hole brace, indicating that Guild was date stamping tops in the first quarter of 1970. This would give a firm date for when the top assembly was completed.

 

[fronobulax]

We also have seen examples where the SN charts are wrong

OK. I think we just interpret things differently.

When The Book says "1969: no peghead overlay, silkscreened Guild logo. Standard pickguard shape." does that mean there were no D25's with no overlay and a silkscreened logo made on or after January 1. 1970?

 

[NM156]

I'm not an expert but the label looks too new to me. The guitar looks correct, superficially. This could be a fake.

 

[fronobulax]

I'm not an expert but the label looks too new to me. The guitar looks correct, superficially. This could be a fake.

You're entitled to your opinion but the label looks fine and properly aged to me. Perhaps we are not both talking about OG 269?

I would also wonder, if the instrument was a fake, how much the faker spent to make it and how much they made by selling it? There's not a lot of money in faking a D25.

 

[E-Type]

You're entitled to your opinion but the label looks fine and properly aged to me. Perhaps we are not both talking about OG 269?

I would also wonder, if the instrument was a fake, how much the faker spent to make it and how much they made by selling it? There's not a lot of money in faking a D25.

Are you thinking the fake was done in 1970 and it has made its way to 2022? I could see faking a D55, but not a "lowly" D25. Still, this would be a really good fake. And you cannot fake old that easily (or economically), so it can't be a new fake either. I can see trying to fake a '59 Les Paul, but a D25? No.

 

[Heath]

I want to start this to say I believe no part of this guitar is in any way fake, but a side note - I could see faking a D25 much more easily than a ‘59 Les Paul as the Les Paul would be so over scrutinized given its value it would far harder to pass off as real.