M-85 case question

[nmiller]

The bass is an early solidbody. The case is too deep for it, even with a piece of foam propping up the body. Could it be a leftover hollowbody case?

 

[SFIV1967]

1969/1970 case, looks even deeper than your case! Look how much more room there is over the lock.





Ralf

 

[Happy Face]

If it was an old case for a hollowbody M-85 it might be valuable. Those appear to be as rare as chickens teeth, as they say. Some purist collector might find it irresistible.

Not to me because I don't display my M-85.

 

[nmiller]

That looks almost exactly like my case - just taken from a slightly shallower angle. Mine doesn't have the neck pad inside the lid, but otherwise it appears to be identical.

 

[fronobulax]

Looks like a case for the hollowbody. I'd ask @The Guilds of Grot sinc he has hollow and solid and may have cases.

 

[The Guilds of Grot]

Yes, I would say that case is for a hollow-body.

The thing I don't remember without visiting the "Vault", is if I have a thinner case for the solid-body.

 

[thornev]

I put foam on the strings to keep the guitar from moving when transporting, not under the guitar. I get very thick foam. Works great.

 

[nmiller]

I've seen different cases from later in the '70s, but without seeing them side by side I'm not sure if they're thinner.

As it is, I can't close the lid without something supporting the body; the headstock just sits too high. I plan on making a thicker support for the body end to keep everything from rattling around.

 

[hieronymous]

The bass is an early solidbody. The case is too deep for it, even with a piece of foam propping up the body. Could it be a leftover hollowbody case?

Wow, your bass looks to be in great condition! I'm thinking that's an early one like mine because no master volume? Mine has no case, wish it did though I haven't left the house with it in a couple of years due to the pandemic.

 

[SFIV1967]

One of the issues I think to see is that simply the foam which was under that support area (marked by X) is simply no longer foam but dust, same happened to the foam on the sides of the body. So when new there was sufficient support under the body to lift the body up and hence bring the headstock down.



Ralf

 

[nmiller]

Wow, your bass looks to be in great condition! I'm thinking that's an early one like mine because no master volume? Mine has no case, wish it did though I haven't left the house with it in a couple of years due to the pandemic.

Well... up close it's more of a player's-grade instrument. Replacement brass nut and brass saddles, overspray over buckle rash on the back, and a couple of replacement caps inside. But it was priced accordingly, and it is on the lighter side for one of these at 8¾ lbs. And it does sound unusually clear even with 250K pots (which appear to be original) - I like these and JS basses but they're normally not the brightest. The serial puts it at 1972.

One of the issues I think to see is that simply the foam which was under that support area (marked by X) is simply no longer foam but dust, same happened to the foam on the sides of the body. So when new there was sufficient support under the body to lift the body up and hence bring the headstock down.



Ralf

I know what you mean - old foam frequently crumbles and thins out. But in this case, it's still nice and plump, both on the bottom and the sides. I'm going to have to add at least 1.5 inches to the bottom to make the bass sit level.

 

[SFIV1967]

But in this case, it's still nice and plump, both on the bottom and the sides.

Ah, o.k., so that seems to be not the issue in your case.
Ralf

 

[The Guilds of Grot]

Nothing a plush folded towel won't fix!