1993 Warwick Thumb bolt on

[JamesTb2]

Hey there I'm new to the forums and was wondering, I have had this bass for about 5 years and was wondering what the serial number means here. it is
C-000016-93. It is a Thumb bolt on. All I could find online is that bolt on thumbs started in 94? Also whats the deal with the numbering? Is it the 16th bolt on Thumb made or is it the 16th one made in march of 93?

 

[trujo777]

the letter indicates the month.. thus C stands for March. The last 2 digits is the year of production so 1993 it is.

I did not know what you say about no Thumb BO until 1994 that's new to me.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Probably taken from wikipeadia

Ive heard of 93 BO's

 

[JamesTb2]

hey so its a 93 I get that, Now whats up with the numbering is it the 16th one in production or is it the 16th one made in march?

 

[I-play-bass]

hey so its a 93 I get that, Now whats up with the numbering is it the 16th one in production or is it the 16th one made in march?

16th in March I would assume.

 

[golem]

I spoze one needs to know whether the s/n's
got stamped onto necks whenever necks are
complete, or is a s/n stamped only when the
neck is joined to a body. If all the Wick neck
sockets are alike, did they run large batches
of neck production and build BO basses from
a stockpile of necks, with older dates already
stamped on the necks ?
​

 

[slashin_velvet]

I spoze one needs to know whether the s/n's got stamped onto necks whenever necks are complete, or is a s/n stamped only when the neck is joined to a body. If all the Wick neck sockets are alike, did they run large batches of neck production and build BO basses from a stockpile of necks, with older dates already stamped on the necks ?

This is a good point to consider. Though, if these were the first BO's that warwick provided, why would they have a backlogue of necks?

 

[golem]

This is a good point to consider. Though, if
these were the first BO's that warwick provided,
why would they have a backlogue of necks?

I think there were BO Wicks before Thumbs.
Some Vetts and Fortresses, Streamer LX etc.

I'm no expert on which came first but I don't
bleeb the Thumb BO was their first BO. IOW,
there's no such thing, on the BO side of the
famberly, as a 'Thumb Neck' or a 'Vett Neck'.
All BO necks would just be 'Warwick 4-string'
and 'Warwick 5-string', etc.

OTOH, even if the Thumb BO really IS Wick's
first BO, necks could have been made up first,
and who knows why body production, or final
neck-body-hardware assembly, did not follow
quickly after, thus crossing into the next year.
I mean, stuff just happens.
​

 

[Florin]

The SN is stamped after the bass is checked, tuned, etc Is the last part of the production.

The number indicates the 16th one made in 93, and probably ever.

 

[Boyitz]

Awesome. Now I need to go check the sn on my 93 bolt-on.

 

[golem]

What happens if it's higher than 16 ? ? ?
​

 

[Boyitz]

I'm not sure, Golem. Perhaps, I'll have a breakdown. Either that, or I'll still be just as happy that I have a reasonably unique Thumb. Either way, there will be tears. I'm sappy like that.

 

[flipper_gv]

does it have the walnut body like most very early BO's? pics?

 

[JamesTb2]

I'll post some pics tomorrow hopefully then you can tell me.

 

[Shoewreck]

The number indicates the 16th one made in 93, and probably ever.

Given it's a '93 make, it's most likely the 16th ever

 

[Mr. Thumb]

Mine is the 4th. HA! :lol:

I win.

 

[Boyitz]

I completely keep forgetting to look. I'll have to take a peek tonight at practice.

 

[trujo777]

we want pics!!! we want pics!!!

 

[Mr Rabble]

Those old Walnut BO's were great basses

 

[Boyitz]

I'd like to see pics, too. I'll take a few more of mine tonight, if I remember.