# About The Jackson JDR 94



## jvms (Jan 26, 2013)

Hello, I'm having a chance to get one of these Jacksons for a good price and I'd like to get some opinions on it. I heard the neck is comparable to the Wizzard I. Is it true? I know the bridge isn't that great, but I plan on puting a Gotoh or a Super Vee on it. With one of these bridges, and good pickups, would it be comparable to an early 80s RG in playabillity and tone (if the RG had same pickups as it, of course)? Also, is the JDR 94 much worse than a USA Jackson? Is the neck simillar to the USA Soloist or the Speed Neck?

Thank you for the attention.


----------



## jvms (Jan 27, 2013)

Bump


----------



## snowblind56 (Jan 27, 2013)

Solid guitar for the money. The neck should be similar to an Ibanez Wizard. Much thinner than the newer Jackson's, much thinner than a USA Soloist or speed neck. The trem is solid. It's not terrible like some licensed floyds are, but a Schaller should be a direct drop in. 

While it's a solid guitar, USA Jackson's are in a completely different league. Granted, a guitar like this can be had for 1/10th the price of a USA Jackson.


----------



## s4tch (Jan 27, 2013)

I had two of those, check NGD thread here:
http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/standard-guitars/203572-accidental-double-ngd-jackson-twins.html







The neck is thin indeed. Those mid-'90s MIJ Jacksons, Dinkys, Fusions included, had thin, fast necks. The profile is different than an RG, though. These have a bit rounder, C-shaped necks, and I found that a bit comfier than the original Wizard. With a good setup, these are great players. As for the trem, I think these were made by Schaller. Quality-wise, these are between a Lo-Trs and an Edge, pretty sensitive, stable, but not the most durable trem that I've ever seen. The bridge pickup sounds fine, cool harmonics, articulated midrange, but the other two are meh. Both of my guitars resonated like you'd expect from a 20-year-old bolt-on guitar, just like the good old RGs. To compare these with an RG550 or an RG570 (I had both):

RG:
+ better trem (Edge is second to none)
+ better factory pickups
+ just a tiny bit better rosewood

JDR:
+ rounder, but still crazy thin neck is comfier for me
+ better fretboard radius for my taste
+ superior, a lot more durable finish
+ better fret access (check lower horn shape)

If I had to pick one of an RG550 and a JDR-94, I'd choose the Jackson, but it would be a very close call. However, I'd definitely choose a Dinky Professional ('90-'97) over any RG5XX in an instant. Those had an even better neck, better fretwork, better woods, a cool Takeuchi trem, great screaming pickups, comfier neck joint, and an overall quality unmached by sub-$1000 guitars from these days. Some Japanese Jackson Professionals from the '90s were up there with the USA ones, check this comparison for confirmation:
Jackson Rhoads guitars, In-depth comparison of the Rhoads Pro and the RR1
Concepts were a bit cheaper than Professionals, but still great guitars. I payed like 200 (shipping included) for both of my JDR-94s, there's no way I could get a similar RG for that price.

tl;dr: go for it.


----------



## jvms (Jan 27, 2013)

Thanks for the answers dudes, but that review says that the Professional has 19.1mm neck, while the Wizzard I has a 17mm neck. Wasn't they suposed to bit a bit more simillar? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBqQu4YiiBg This guy it's not "Ibanez Thin", but is it at least thinner then the JDR 94? You also talked about the Fusion Models. Does the thin ceck also apllies to the Gover Jackson and Charvel Models like this one? http://www.ebay.com/itm/1998-Charve...s-/140788524609?pt=Guitar&hash=item20c7a66641 What's the difference between the Jacksons and Grovers?


----------



## s4tch (Jan 28, 2013)

I don't know the Grover Jacksons. As for the Charvels, I've seen some bolt-ons from the '90s, and they had similarly thin necks. I wouldn't bother finding the thinnest possible neck, you won't ever notice 1mm. I'd go for either a f'in cheap or a dead mint guitar. Jackson Professional necks are thin enough for tiny hands and for any shredder's taste, believe me.

Anyway, the guy in the vid is wrong about thickness. Check the catalog scan for data:
JC1993Page25 &lsaquo; Guitar Gallery
My DR5 from '96 had a 17mm neck, too. Maybe the guy who wrote the review mesured the neck thickness with frets included.

Do mind that Fusions have a shorter, Les Paul-like 24,75" scale. Other old Jacksons generally have a "normal" 25,5" scale.


----------

