X bracing placement on smaller size guitar

[Mike Sandor]

I need some advice regarding the X bracing placement. I am planning a scaled down version of a GS Taylor shaped guitar. Top bout 10.5, waist 9.00 and lower bout 15.00.
Staying with a 25.5 scale. Not really a “parlor” size guitar but getting close. On previous builds, I have been following Mario’s recommendation to place the X bracing at approx. 9 3/16” from the 14th fret. The problem I am having is in order to maintain the 9 3/16” dimension and leaving the current intersecting angle on the cross bracing, the wings of the bridge does not lay on the bracing. Would I simply change the angle until I catch the bridge and maintain the distance to the 14th fret or am I missing something?
I am not sure if I need to start a new discussion for the following but due to the reduced body size, should I consider modifications to the sound hole size and body depth?
For the full size guitars, I used 3.875 diameter for the sound hole and 4.625 body depth at the lower bout, tapering to approx. 4.000 at the upper.
Thanks,
Mike

[Mario Proulx]

Have a drawing for us to see? Hand drawn, to scale, is fine. What is "cross bracing", or did you mean to say "X bracing"? What angle do you have the X at now? If the same bracing layout worked with a larger guitar at that scale length, it will work equally on a smaller body, since the relationship of bracing to bridge placement remained the same, since you're positioning the bracing relative to the 14th fret.

That's not a small guitar, but about a 00 size, so treat it like a full sized guitar. I'd take the depth down to 4-1/4" at the tail end, run a soundhole around 4 to 4-1/4".

[Mike Sandor]

Sorry, X bracing. The attached shows a side by side. Note if the only thing that changes is the size of the body, the X bracing bracing meets the top 7/8" closer to the lower bout. I guess that is my biggest concern. Also, leave the body depth at 4 1/4" through it entire length or taper it slightly at the upper bout. To me the taper just looks right, how it impacts the sound, I am not sure.
As always, thank you for the advise.

[Mark Swanson]

That is confusing, I thought you said the X brace doesn't meet the bridge wings? This drawing looks good to me.

[Randy Roberts]

I'm with Mark, looks fine to me. If you were thinking you needed to move all the bracing up to stay the same distance from the upper transverse brace above the sound hole, you don't. Is that what was making you think your bridge wings would miss the X?

Only thing I'd change would be adding "A" bracing from the neck block down through the transverse brace. If your neck block has a tongue, or some other support under the fretboard area of the top, then nevermind.

And Mario has given you good advice on thinning the body down a little. 4.625 might end up looking a little chubby with all your other dimensions reduced. You still would want to taper it.

[Mario Proulx]

That looks just fine; I'd perhaps delete the rearmost tone bar, or make it very short and narrow, and delete one each of the finger bars.

Yes, keep your taper; whatever taper you're used to using, but start with the tail end at 4-1/4"(or even 4-1/8", like Martin's 00) and taper to the neck block.

[Mike Sandor]

I removed one finger brace and relocated the other to centralize location under the wing. Deleted one tone bar. I have added the rest of what I plan to use for bracing. I do a slightly modified version of the
" Taylor" neck joint. Am thinking about slightly scalloping the bracing as well. Side note: I owe you guys, as with out guidance and knowledge portrayed on this web site, I would have built a guitar or two, but none of them would have turned out as well as they have with out your help and others on the site.
Thanks you..........

[Chuck Tweedy]

I'd make the bridge and bridge plate a lot smaller.
Gotta un-crowd a small body like that.

[Mike Sandor]

Good catch, I did not scale those down in the drawing.