• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

How thin is too thin?

Fynn

Fynn

Jan 6, 2022
1,152
1,406
25
Germany
#1
I know that this has been asked before, but I'm not sure if it has been asked in my sort of context before. I'm building a CT style instrument and I know that the more modern CT basses are quite thin. But how thin are they actually?
Since I'm planning to add a Kahler tremolo, I want to make sure that it'll support all the pressure that I will give it with normal playing.

The wood that I currently plan on using for the body is mostly walnut and some mahogany. The mahogany will be the connecting piece underneath the heelblock and the centerblock of the body. The centerblock and the wings are gonna be walnut.
Now, the walnut is 32mm thick, so not very thick. If I use only the walnut for the wings, then that sort of limites me to those 32mm thickness, because in order to make the entire body even, I would have to make the centerblock smaller.
Is 32mm good enough? The screws on the Kahler definitely aren't that long, but would that structurally make any sense?

I tend to underestimate the structural integrity of wood quite often, but maybe someone has some exact measurements of a modern Carl Thompson, so I can be a bit more at peace.
 
#2
Can't help specifically with that tremolo, but 32mm is plenty thick enough for a bass body. I made one last year at 34mm and could easily have gone thinner.

Edit: by the way, your body wings don't have to be as thick as the centre beam, take a look at a thunderbird for example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aqualung60, Engle and Fynn
#3
Flying B said:
Can't help specifically with that tremolo, but 32mm is plenty thick enough for a bass body. I made one last year at 34mm and could easily have gone thinner.

Edit: by the way, your body wings don't have to be as thick as the centre beam, take a look at a thunderbird for example.
Click to expand...
Great, thanks!
And you're right actually. I thought it might be a bit weird to make the wings smaller, but sure I've seen that done before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Engle
#5
My thinnest body is 28mm thick. The strength for the tremolo (vibrato) will be moot, as all of these common woods are plenty strong to hold strings as they come back up to pitch. :D A bigger consideration for a thin body is the neck pocket (for bolt ons) and the necessary space for electronics - pickup depth and pot depth especially, but also battery box if needed. :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phaidrus, Engle, Gilmourisgod and 2 others
#8
Fynn said:
Great, thanks!
And you're right actually. I thought it might be a bit weird to make the wings smaller, but sure I've seen that done before.
Click to expand...
Ibanez was doing it a lot in the 90s (look at the S-series guitars in Invalid Link Removed). Currently they taper the thickness on the bodies of their EHB-series basses (the upper wing is thinner than the center, and the lower wing is thickest presumably for the benefit of the control cavity).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Engle, Fynn and Beej
#9
Gilmourisgod said:
32MM works out to 1-1/4", same thickness as a Rickenbacker body. The specs on a tremolo will give depth, I don't think a Kahler would fit. You might run into balance issues unless you go headless or use ultralight tuners.
Click to expand...
Why don't you think the Kahler would fit that? I've seen that Carl still puts some trems on his recently built basses, you think those are thicker than a normal CT?
Didn't know that Ricks were that thin. I imagine that Chris Squires Rick must've been unbelivably thin then.

Edit:
I checked, the Kahler needs a depth of 22.9mm. Altough even that seems a bit excessive to me. But they probably have their reasons.
I already got the Kahler. Only checked the depth of the screws so far and those definitely fit just fine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Engle
#10
Fynn said:
Why don't you think the Kahler would fit that? I've seen that Carl still puts some trems on his recently built basses, you think those are thicker than a normal CT?
Didn't know that Ricks were that thin. I imagine that Chris Squires Rick must've been unbelivably thin then.

Edit:
I checked, the Kahler needs a depth of 22.9mm. Altough even that seems a bit excessive to me. But they probably have their reasons.
I already got the Kahler. Only checked the depth of the screws so far and those definitely fit just fine.
Click to expand...

The Kahler needs a little bit of additional depth to accommodate the movement of the lower mechanism when you press down on the vibrato bar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fynn and Engle
#11
Fynn said:
I know that this has been asked before, but I'm not sure if it has been asked in my sort of context before. I'm building a CT style instrument and I know that the more modern CT basses are quite thin. But how thin are they actually?
Since I'm planning to add a Kahler tremolo, I want to make sure that it'll support all the pressure that I will give it with normal playing.

The wood that I currently plan on using for the body is mostly walnut and some mahogany. The mahogany will be the connecting piece underneath the heelblock and the centerblock of the body. The centerblock and the wings are gonna be walnut.
Now, the walnut is 32mm thick, so not very thick. If I use only the walnut for the wings, then that sort of limites me to those 32mm thickness, because in order to make the entire body even, I would have to make the centerblock smaller.
Is 32mm good enough? The screws on the Kahler definitely aren't that long, but would that structurally make any sense?

I tend to underestimate the structural integrity of wood quite often, but maybe someone has some exact measurements of a modern Carl Thompson, so I can be a bit more at peace.
Click to expand...
If you can't adjust your pickups, it's probably too thin
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fynn and Flamingo21
#14
If the Kahler will fit, you are Golden. I think I read that Squire's Ric was down to something like 1-1/8" thick after all the times it got shaved. I don't think it had much to do with his tone, but it must have been feather-light for a huge guy like Squire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fynn

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back