OK, but what's the point of looking at it that way?
The fact is Gibson never made a 4 banger tune-o-matic that looked just like the 6 banger tune-o-matic but bigger. Never (until this recent LP bass iteration). Obviously the tune-o-matic design belongs to Gibson and the Chinese/Wilkinson/whoever ripped it off and modified it for bass use; nobody would ever dispute that, but the fact remains that Gibson never thought to do this (or used to think it a bad idea if it did occur to them).
I'd consider the individual saddle adjustment mechanism to be the defining feature of the tune-o-matic (as it is the GD namesake of the thing) moreso than a seperate tailpeice. It was unike anything else at the time that Gibson originally came up with it. The 2/3 point then used the same saddle design/adjustment mechanism, even if slightly differently implemented vis a vis string anchoring and longer travel for intonation, making the thing(s) look very different. I think I even remember old Gibson lit referring to the 2 piont as a 'bass tune-o-matic,' but I'll have to check up on that.
I'm not saying it looks like a Chinese bridge; I'm saying it IS a Chinese bridge (that Gibson never designed, even though they designed the original that this one was based on.... and the reason why Gibson never did this themselves being that it probably isn't very good, as regards saddle travel, but then the Artcores used it and it looked pretty cool and nobody here really knows the rest of the story). The need to slant the bridge to get the right striing spacing is indicative of the metric vs imperial nature of Chinese vs US made hardware.
