What's the Warranty Worth

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by WindKnot

My question is: in your experience, would you opt for the new model with warranty for an extra $400, or save money now and risk repair costs down the line?

For me, it depends on the guitar. If a guitar has a glued in mortise/tenon neck joint, I want the warranty (The neck reset on my 1988 D-16 didn't cost me a penny).

If the guitar has a bolt-on neck, such as my Taylors, then I'm not as concerned. I'd still rather have it than not have it but I could be swayed if the deal were good enough.

[auggie242]

Given the way Martin keeps redefining what their warranty does and doesn't cover (and I own 8 warranty covered Martins), I don't think their word is worth the paper it's written on. It pains me to say it, but I'll never buy another new guitar from those folks.

[AndrewG]

It might be worth mentioning that Martin's limited 'lifetime' warranty is only available for US-purchased instruments. Outside the US we only get a year, and the warranty makes the retailer, not the builder (Martin), liable for fixing any fault within that period under UK consumer legislation. Even if it were a genuine lifetime warranty, the hassle of shipping the thing overseas, along with a wait of several months to get it back, hopefully undamaged in transit, is too much when there are many perfectly competent luthiers over here anyway.

[BrunoBlack]

For a $400 difference I’d take the warranty, especially for a guitar you plan on keeping.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Marshall

I have a friend with a 1972 D28. He hardly ever plays it. I piayed it and told him he needs a neck reset. The action was awful. He's the original owner. I told him it should be under warranty.

He was vacationing on the east coast. Took the guitar along. Dropped it off with Martin. He didn't have the original purchase receipt (from 1972). He didn't have "proof" that he bought it. They said he hadn't taken proper care of it. They took it and charged him something like $1,700 to do some work on it.

So much for a life-time warranty.

This is a ridiculous criticism. The warranty applies only to the original owner. Your friend obviously never registered the guitar and there's no way for Martin to verify that he was the original purchaser 45 years ago because your friend didn't take care of the responsibility on his end.

[musicman1951]

I had Martin warranty work done - painfully slow, but saved me a lot of money.

$400 is too small a difference for me. I'd try offering less for the used guitar, but go new for that price difference.

[Mbroady]

Hey windknot

Have you played both? I would go with the better sounding (to you) guitar.
Also compare new prices (60% of map is what you can get new for). I would also check eBay for used (sold) prices.

All things being equal- both guitars sound and play great- i would pay the difference for new, but not list price.

[WindKnot]

So, I should offer some follow-up on this thread:

On Saturday night, I had made my mind up that I would go in on Monday and buy the new sunburst GE.

However, sometime on Sunday I learned about the D Mahogany and that threw a wrinkle in things.

Last night I ordered a new old stock D Mahogany for what I feel is a deal too good to pass up. It's hundreds less than the used GE, comes with warranty and has all the features I was looking for.

NGD post should be coming soon.

[Shades of Blue]

The warranty is great, and it feels really cool to get the new guitar with the perks. But, sometimes used guitars are too good of a deal to worry about missing out on warranties. I generally only buy used though if the used price is $500 less than new. So I guess the "new experience" is worth $500 to me.

[ManyMartinMan]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

If you're willing to take a chance, go used, but if you want peace of mind, pay for new. ..

Agreed. If you think it will be a life-long guitar (if you do that) then new is the way to go. If you are like some here who buy a guitar, sing it's praises as "the best ever", and sell in 6 months, then used. However, if you're going to buy new, take your time and get the guitar you want.

[00-28]

Originally Posted by auggie242

Given the way Martin keeps redefining what their warranty does and doesn't cover (and I own 8 warranty covered Martins), I don't think their word is worth the paper it's written on. It pains me to say it, but I'll never buy another new guitar from those folks.

Have you ever needed to use the warranty on any of your guitars, and if so was there a problem?

......Mike

[vindibona1]

Well... It all depends. All but two of my guitars are old and all but one was purchased used. A well built guitar shouldn't need any warranty work for 30 or 40 years. But I feel that anything that is a manufacturing defect will happen in the first few years.

I just had my '72 D35's neck reset and did a refret with new nut and saddle. I figure the total cost of the guitar plus the work equals what I'd pay for a new guitar... except I have a 45 year old guitar that sounds like no other and functionally in like-new condition. No regrets. I'll never sell this guitar.

As someone else said, if the new guitar is only $400 more INCLUDING TAX, remove the tax from the number and use the purchase price only for negotiating for the used one. You should pay no more than 60% of new, excluding tax for a used instrument. If not, it's not a good deal. However, remember that when you buy new the tax is a penalty that you'll never recover if you sell it, plus your new guitar depreciates the moment you walk out of the store with it. Yeah- it's complicated.

Good luck.

[Jim in TC]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

If you're willing to take a chance, go used, but if you want peace of mind, pay for new. I bought my '13 Taylor new in '16 and it was perfect. 9 months later it developed a small finish lift at the bridge. Taylor fixed it under warranty when it was 4 years old. Without the warranty, that would have been a several-hundred dollar repair on my dime.

Ditto.

I have seen Martins last and last, and others that needed some (unexpected) work down the road. Me? Now I would buy the warranty. When I was closer to broke I would have bought used.

[auggie242]

Originally Posted by 00-28

Have you ever needed to use the warranty on any of your guitars, and if so was there a problem?

......Mike

Hi Mike!
Yes, back around the turn of the century I had an '86 and a '78 that both needed (among other things) a neck reset. I had the work done by an authorized Martin repair person (actually Bruce Petros of Petros Guitars) and I think all I paid for was a refret on the older of the two guitars. I was more than pleased.

Fast forward to 2017 and Martin decrees that neck resets are no longer covered by their pre-existing warranties except under very limited circumstances and, that they never should have been covered in the past. Now, I was told when I purchased my Martins, explicitly, by multiple sales reps at multiple guitar shops, over multiple years, that neck resets would be covered under my ''lifetime'' warranty. I don't think that each of them made this claim up out of their own imagination. This was obviously the company policy at the time. Today, about the only coverage for resets is if the neck warps or actually comes loose. New management, new bean counters, and no apologies for lying to me about their warranty coverage back in 1978, 1986, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2016 when I dropped an average of $3K plus on each purchase of their product.

I love the Martin sound. To my ear, nothing comes close. I've met Chris IV and found him charming. I've talked to Martin factory workers who say it's a great place to be employed. Dick Boak walks on water. I love playing the Martins that I've already purchased. I was a long time member of the Martin Owners Club. In short, I've been a ''fanboy/kool-aid drinker'' ever since I discovered their product back in 1971 and I bought one as soon as I could afford one. But, if they are not going to honor their word re: the ''lifetime'' warranty, in essence if they are going to lie to all of us, then it will be a cold day in you know where before I'll purchase another of their products new. I'll wait and buy it used for less. Bitter? Maybe, but I hope not. Disappointed? Big time!

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by auggie242

Hi Mike!
Fast forward to 2017 and Martin decrees that neck resets are no longer covered by their pre-existing warranties except under very limited circumstances and, that they never should have been covered in the past.

The "very limited circumstances" are cases of obvious abuse. It may be true that in the past Martin was more lenient and would do neck resets even when a guitar was severely dried out but that was never part of their warranty. I don't know of any guitar company that routinely covers damage caused by abuse. If a neck needs a reset simply because time & tension have taken their toll, the reset is still covered under warranty.