HM Strat body shape : the origins

[archtop]

We know the neck is different from a Startocaster one : 24 frets and 25.1" scale, what about the body ?

I took a blueprint of a 62 Stratocaster to compare with HM Strat and discovered a quite different body shape.



When superposing, the design of the horns is similar starting from the neck but thinner from the top of the horns as the bottom around the bridge is also thinner and shorter.



I then compared the classical 62 Stratocaster to other guitars bodies :

Nowadays Stratocaster : identical to Strat 62 but bottom a bit longer under the bridge



Ibanez RG : astonishingly similar to Strat 62 but slightly longer horns with the edge cut from the top of the horns to the neck




Fender Lead II (my own ;D) : same shape as the HM strat for the bottom of the guitar or at least very very similar.



HM Strat body seems to be a mix of the bottom of the Fender Lead with the horns of the Stratocaster featuring a specific neck !!!


I then investigated this and superposed the HM Strat shape over the Lead II.






Not the same but that close ! The Lead is a 79-82 model, the small body work and design have quite obviously inspired the HM Strat creation, what do you think ?

[heem6]

Interesting comparisons, Archtop!

Fender Japan was producing the Contemporary Stratocaster in the years leading up to the HM (with locking trems), so I've always assumed it was a natural progression. Here's a picture of a Contemporary if you'd like to make a comparison.

[archtop]

Yet another shape somewhere in between 62' and HM, let's have a look :

Contemporary vs 62' comparison


For me the idea is clear : lower horn is the same, upper horn is shorter with the same body curve but a finger inside to have a narrower body; and the bottom is not flat but slant at the forearm cut.

Contemporary vs HM comparison


Visibly a different guitar, Contemporary is a different shape from the HM trying something different deeper rooted in the classical Stratocaster shape.

[heem6]

So if I'm "reading" these comparisons correctly, looks like the HM is shorter at the bottom than the '62 and the Contemporary.

I wonder what Fender's rationale for that was?

[monsta]

i wonder if the rationale was something as simple as making it look more reminiscent of a jackson or something? if the HM model was a Fender "reaction" to losing market share to super strats it could be something that silly. i love the shape and feel of this guitar though.

[archtop]

Yes the body of the HM is the shortest, and also the narrowest than both others. Smaller indeed !

Difficult to put a rationale behind a looking design, but my clue brings to the Lead shape, and as a reminding both also shared the same pickup configuration : one single humbucker for one HM model and the Lead I.

This let quite an important part of the body empty, that can be weird regarding the large 62' shape.

Thus a shorter body helps balancing the "filled" and "empty" places.
The designer has certainly taken the Lead as a model looking for how to solve the single HB issue visualy speaking and he adapted a Strat looking over the Lead dimensions.

That's my purely design constrainst interpretation ;D

[kareoke king kareoke heckler t]

to all you hot shot guitar player here we all go too plse send to Jason anctil,sfacebookpage

[ollknot]

Great thread! Ive got a bit of korina knocking about and a flame maple neck blank, i was considering a tele or something but this has swayed me, its gonna be an hm

[db133]

Hi

Any one have the Colour Codes ?


kind regards .

[heem6]

The stock HM Strat humbucker is a DiMarzio Super 3, so the DiMarzio color codes here will work for the stock bridge humbuckers.