Would you buy a Warwick with a nonwarwick truss rod?

boston asphalt2

Official Forum Pain in the Ass
Moderator
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
2,366
Reaction score
197
Looking at a Thumb BO5 that is in decent condition. The only issue is the truss rod had to be replaced. It was done professionally by a luthier who removed the fretboard and replaced it and then put the fretboard back on. It was immaculately done. No evidence except one tiny nick in the fingerboard. However, the truss rod is not from Warwick. It is from another company, but is the same length and specs as the original one. Would that make you hesitate on buying it? I can't decide. Part of me says no it's all good as log as the truss works, but I also hesitate in case that truss rod just isn't quite right. Thoughts? Would you do it?
 
`



There is no reason to assume Wick makes their own truss rods.
Maybe they do, maybe they don't. They make [or contract for]
their bridges, but buy their tuning machines. Many top quality
instruments are a mix of in-house and purchased hardware.

MM is also proud of their proprietary bridge. IIRC the excellent
tuners are Schallers. Etc ad nauseum. So if this truss rod job
was by a quality minded luthier [as it so appears] there's no
reason to expect an inferior truss rod.

Truss rods just aren't expensive. The cost difference between
the best and the cheap ones is minimal. Only if you're making
hundreds or thousands of basses do you save a pile of money
choosing the lesser truss rod. Same with output jacks. They
can be such a frequent fail point and yet the Switch Craft, the
best, only costs several dollars at retail. Acoarst if you build
Squiers or such, by the zillions, you save $2 per unit times a
zillion units ! Save $5 a unit times a zillion truss rods, etc etc.
 
I would not hesitate for one second. Warwick truss rods aren't the holy grail or anything.
In fact I had a removable truss rod improved by using stronger alloys then W used themselves.

Go for it.
 
`






There's benefit to a bass thaz already got a replacement
truss rod, by a quality shop acoarst !

As our instruments age we find we run short of truss rod
adjustment range. Steel doesn't stretch [much] but wood
compresses and the pressure of the truss rod compresses
the surface of the wood where it bears upon it. Then you
hafta crank the rod some more, until someday there's no
more adjustment left [if lucky, "someday" never comes].

A quality replacement job would include compensating for
compression thaz already occured. Thaz good. Also, later
compression is negligible compared to the initial and early
years compression, cuz the surface gets harder where the
rod has compressed it. Thaz even more good.

IOW, while any ax is at some risk of needing a new truss
rod some day due to compression, the risk of needing to
replace the replacement rod again is negligible.
 
It would have to be an incredible deal, or stunning grain in the wood. There's plenty of other Thumbs that haven't had open heart surgery. I'd be a little concerned about integrity over the years, decades.... and resale value.
 
It would have to be an incredible deal, or stunning grain in the wood. There's plenty of other Thumbs that haven't had open heart surgery. I'd be a little concerned about integrity over the years, decades.... and resale value.

You're going to make me blow my cover on what it is by responding to this. Please hold.....
 
So, I am looking to pick up a Dirty Blonde 5 (so, not just any Thumb 5 BO lol!). I had one years ago, and Dana B Goods had to replace the truss rod in that one so the initial "the truss rod was replaced" didn't phase me. It was when I heard it was non-warwick, that I was concerned. I met with the guy today and checked it out and its pretty tight. He is a musician from South Africa, and bought this new and toured with it and hasn't used it since moving here to the USA.

That being said, because it was a tour bass, it is a bit beat up, but so what, that just means it was loved! I want to ask people here about the two pictures of finish imperfections below. This bass comes new with a satin finish. Comparing the marks with the wood around them, there is one hell of a color contrast. I noticed this in pictures, but when I went to see it in person, the finish had almost a high polish gloss look to it. Does the satin finish, when used a lot, wear to look like a clear high polish finish? I have no reason to not believe the guy that it was never refinished in any way, but it has me wondering, because, even to the feel, the finish felt like a high polish finish, not a satin finish. So, here are the pictures. What do you guys think regarding this concern?

00t0t_kwZRY2fEnEv_1200x900_zpsqlxjsmsn.jpg
00X0X_5vIWzNcUrjY_1200x900_zpszggh9hjr.jpg
00t0t_fExpAWF3EZI_600x450_zpspts4jzht.jpg
 
Hummmm interesting, mines satin al over, has not glossed up from rub/use. I had a Spector matte which glossed up big time after minor use. I'll say just over the years of use and sweat etc, I'm no expert obviously, Just my experience with that Spector,

Great steal by the way ;) lovley basses these are to play and look at on a wall !

Ps: maybe he has been one of the ones that wax his satin finish everyday!
 
I second that Hmmmmm.

It does kinda look like it had a gloss finish put on and it's pealing off in those few spots. That lighter color looks a bit more like the Swamp Ash should normally looks on those Blondies.

Still a beauty!!
 
image.jpgimage.jpg

I tend to think the back on the dirty blond ash has some kind of covering, here is 2 swamp backs of my basses, you will see the swamp on the $$ is pretty much the same color as the maple but no where near with thumb,
 
image.jpg


And a front shot becuase we like to look at warwicks/dirty blondes :)
 
Hmmm I'm going to ask him if he ever waxed it. Even if he did, for the price I'm grabbing it, I can't be too upset. Maybe when I make my money at my new high falutin job, I can have the finish professionally fixed lol
 
Alright he says he never waxed it or anything and it has always had that finish. I'm wondering if perhaps a tech or roadie of his was waxing it or something, because it really felt that kind of "hard to slide on" feeling of high polish finishes
 
Interesting twist to the discussion: do I pick this bass up for s good deal or grab a Thumb NT5 for $2000 USD?
 
I think these are more exotic than a thumb NT5 but good price either way, I have to say it's an acquired sound and quite different to any of my others,
 
I'd take it. A bass that has toured that much, and been taken care of, and that still is in fairly good shape given the life she had... Looks goos to me. And if the trussrod is the "same" as a Warwick one, it might BE a warwick one, I mean the same manufacturer, as I think Warwick aren't manufacturing the rods.
Plus, the dirty blonde looks über cool. And I love the P'up configuration.
 
Interesting twist to the discussion: do I pick this bass up for s good deal or grab a Thumb NT5 for $2000 USD?

Getting a thumb NT5 for $2000 is pretty common (depending on grain). The dirty blonde for a good deal would have my attention even with the replacement truss rod.
 
I'd take it. A bass that has toured that much, and been taken care of, and that still is in fairly good shape given the life she had... Looks goos to me. And if the trussrod is the "same" as a Warwick one, it might BE a warwick one, I mean the same manufacturer, as I think Warwick aren't manufacturing the rods.
Plus, the dirty blonde looks über cool. And I love the P'up configuration.

The two pictures I posted are the worst of the damage. There is a few dings on the headstock (stupid drummers letting their cymbals get in the way, go back to your mom's basement!) and a couple small dents on the front. Really the biggest thing for me was the finish being so odd. The guy is asking $1700 USD, and Im working to bring him down a bit. The last couple of these I saw sold for over $2000, but granted they were in better condition.
 
If it's been repaired it's obviously been looked at in some degree.

I'd do it, especially for the price you're describing.
 
Back
Top