Shaw UOA5 mags measure

[LtKojak]

Can any of you with a Tim Shaw Un-Oriented Alnico 5 magnet post the measures, meaning lenght, width and height?

A Gauss reading would also be great, but not really mandatory for my research.

Thanking bunches in advance,

Yours very truly,

[jonson]

Sorry to take a few days Pepe but not been here but, from a pickup no. 138 1182... so November 82 length is 2.344 in (59.54 mm) width 0.495 in (12.58 mm) thickness slight variation of a couple of thou of an inch but average is 0.130 in ( 3.30 mm ) Hope that does your needs and no gauss reading as I do not bother but listen to every pickup I make.

[LtKojak]

Sorry to take a few days Pepe but not been here but, from a pickup no. 138 1182... so November 82 length is 2.344 in (59.54 mm) width 0.495 in (12.58 mm) thickness slight variation of a couple of thou of an inch but average is 0.130 in ( 3.30 mm ) Hope that does your needs and no gauss reading as I do not bother but listen to every pickup I make.

Thank you very much for the time you took for the measures I've asked and for share'em with me, Jonson. Much appreciated!

It's just what I needed.

Yours very truly,

[JGundry]

I have a magnet that I'm pretty sure came out of a Shaw. It is a short A3 magnet with a tumbled or roto finish. It is a very low charge magnet and if you don't stick it to metal after it is charged it will lose quite a bit of charge over 6 months or so. Shaw mentioned finding unoriented A5 magnets in some P.A.F.'s he tested but I don't think he said they used unoriented A5 in Shaw pickups. I think I'm correct on that?

[LtKojak]

I have a magnet that I'm pretty sure came out of a Shaw. It is a short A3 magnet with a tumbled or roto finish. It is a very low charge magnet and if you don't stick it to metal after it is charged it will lose quite a bit of charge over 6 months or so. Shaw mentioned finding unoriented A5 magnets in some P.A.F.'s he tested but I don't think he said they used unoriented A5 in Shaw pickups. I think I'm correct on that?

Jon, is that magnet slightly thicker, like the one Jonson measured? If it is, you may be on to something.

BTW, short, very weak and not able to hold a charge for longer than three months are magnets I took out of a P-94 set from early '90s.

[JGundry]

Jon, is that magnet slightly thicker, like the one Jonson measured? If it is, you may be on to something.

BTW, short, very weak and not able to hold a charge for longer than three months are magnets I took out of a P-94 set from early '90s.

I'll have to find it. The magnet is so heavily tumbled that it is polished. Someone posted a magnet like it on another that came from a Shaw that had the same look and same low charge.

[EFK]

I've found magnets like that in t tops, dating mid through late 70s (stamped dates on bottom). Heavily tumbled, slightly thinner (possibly due to tumbling?) than expected, and very anemic charge that fades quickly. They also break/crumble EXTREMELY easily. I have no idea what magnet grade they are, however.

[David King]

If they crumble easily they might have been sintered magnets instead of cast. The would explain the unoriented nature and anaemic charge.

[jonson]

This one, and it is without doubt a Shaw is quite battered and has not been tampered with till my grubby mits took hold. It has a magnet with still a fair charge and is probably the the roughest cast magnet I have yet to come across. The slugs are also raw and never been plated so was that intensional or another Gibson just put it together and sell it.

[JGundry]

If they crumble easily they might have been sintered magnets instead of cast. The would explain the unoriented nature and anaemic charge.

The one I have is rough cast.

[EFK]

Unless Gibson was simulating casting texture, they're definitely cast. Despite the tumbling, they still look like castings and not like any sintered magnet I've ever seen.

Jon - since you mention it is A3, can we assume you had it analyzed? A3 would explain a lot. Would also be very contrary to "traditional" 1970s-1980s Gibson magnet belief.

[JGundry]

I had Thomas & Skinner run a BH curve of this magnet. The charge level seems typical of A3 also.

[EFK]

Thank you! I find this very interesting. Good information.

[WolfeMacleod]

I never did believe that the Shaw magnets were un-oriented Alnico 5.

Who came up with that baloney?

From the horse's mouth

[copperheadroads]

There you go from the Mans mouth
my notes say .5" x 2.35" x .130"