Burny RLG-50

[carissaiam]

Hi guys, I currently have a PRS SE Singlecut & am looking to do a partial trade/trade up w/cash on top for a Burny RLG-50. I've heard good things about them. How do they compare to other guitars in the used price range of $450 est. ? Any other cheaper MIJ's I should check out? My PRS is pretty good. Should I just keep it? Any suggestions welcome.

 

[Dirk$Diggler]

There is plenty of info of the RLG-50 on this forum and as far as I've heard the story goes that the RLG-50 was one of the low end models of the Burny catalog. The high end models were all flametops but with thin veneers on top of solid maple plaintops. Because the RLG-50 didn't have a veneer flametop they had to use maple tops that looked decent for the plaintops. The point being that the low end models had better maple tops. Don't know if it's true but thats what's being said.

Anyway...here is my RLG-50 and how it got a new look. It's by far the best guitar I own. My backup is a Gibby . If I were you I'd do anything to get my hands on the Burny!

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/custom-shop/160040-1981-burny-rlg-50-makeover.html

 

[slapshot]

It was $600 in your other thread?

 

[carissaiam]

It was $600 in your other thread?

Haha, caught me. $600 is my future max. budget. As of now I'm trying to spend minimal or no money, to trade up or a partial trade.

 

[J-Dizzle]

I doubt you'd get an RLG-50 for only $450

 

[emptyisvarah]

Early 80's rlg 50s are the sh?t!!! Do iiiit!! : )

 

[slapshot]

I've heard the story goes that the RLG-50 was one of the low end models of the Burny catalog.

the rlg-50 is the plain top.nothing "low end" about that at all.

 

[Dirk$Diggler]

the rlg-50 is the plain top.nothing "low end" about that at all.

The RLG-50 was at the lower end of the Burny catalog (price wise) having the basic features; plain top, 3 piece back, poly, short tenon, budget inlays. "50" indicating the lowest price of the range in yen (50, 60, 80, 90, 120, 150 240 then add a bunch of zeros). English is not my first language but I thought that that was what "low end" meant?

My first guitar is a RLG-50 and my backup is a Gibson Les Paul Classic 1999.

 

[slapshot]

again the rlg-50 is the plain top.nothing "low end" about it at all so please stop spreading that ****ing nonsense mmmmk?

Early 80's rlg 50s are the sh?t!!! Do iiiit!! : )

nope.they all are.
and FLG's knock all their dicks in the dirt anyway

 

[Dirk$Diggler]

again the rlg-50 is the plain top.nothing "low end" about it at all so please stop spreading that ****ing nonsense mmmmk

You argue with a finesse that is unparalleled! You simply make a great case and I stand corrected! You have already stated twice that the RLG-50 is a plain top and that is fantastic news for me because I thought my RLG-50 was a flame top up until the second time you told me. Oh darn, now I forgot again ...is it a flame top or a Plain top?

But I'm still curious as to which model you would rate as the higher end model of the Burny production line out of the RLG-50 and the FLG 240?

 

[reborn old]

I'm not going to argue the merits of one Burny RLG model over another because it often comes down to a matter of taste.

The high end models were all flametops but with thin veneers on top of solid maple plaintops.

I just want to point out that other than early to late 1980's RLG-90 models, and some RLG-70's that followed, other high end Burny flame tops will have solid flame maple caps of varying thicknesses and NOT veneer flame tops. (RLG-120, 150)
The RLG-240 is a solid flame top model, and does not have a figured top cap or veneer.

Burny plain top RLG base models are quite often not so plain, and always include FEB,
which is remarkable, in that other MIJ brand base models usually do not. (other than early Mint Collection Grecos).
You can expect to pay more than base model prices for figured plain tops however.
The cheapest base model RLG's are brilliant black and gold top Standards.
RLC's without ebony boards or premium pickups are comparable in price.

For 1 piece mahogany backs, you do usually have to go with higher end models.

photo #2 courtesy of Wulfman.

 

[wulfman]

Thanks Reborn, credit me with the shot of the guitar with crooked pointers!!!

I think we all know that RLG-50's were the "budget" level LP guitars in the catalog and yes, the "low-end of the Burny line" in that regard, but I'd take one over an RLG-60 every time. I never had an RLG-90 so can't say much about the difference but there are some prime examples of RLG-50 tops that put the clone flame tops of a lot of 60 and 90 models to shame IMO.

 

[reborn old]

Thanks Reborn, credit me with the shot of the guitar with crooked pointers!!!

How about the pic right above it with no pointers ?


Thanks again ! nice Les Paul, as are the others you've posted.

 

[steveb73b]

Nothing wrong with an RLG-50


P2203141-1 by steveb73b, on Flickr

 

[3pupLPC]

You're not getting a RLG-50 for anywhere near $450. I gave one away to a friend a couple of months ago for $675. Expect to spend $750 at least.

I've owned 50's, 60's, and a 90. I have to say, the 90 had a feel to it that was very special. The cap was also the correct thickness. That said, I will take a 50 over a 60/70 ANY day... (no heel-cap models though, please).

 

[slapshot]

look at all those horrible LOW END pieces of shit

 

[wulfman]

That said, I will take a 50 over a 60/70 ANY day... (no heel-cap models though, please).

No problem, leave all those early 80's neck-heel-cap pointy-pointer low-enders alone!

 

[MauiCliff]

No problem, leave all those early 80's neck-heel-cap pointy-pointer low-enders alone!

Your right Harold....... everyone ... PLEASE ... pass on those...!!!!

 

[slapshot]

leave the pathetic rig-60s alone too.who knows whats under that shitty gold

 

[Olds442]

i have one simple request.

can we get those two to mud wrestle?