Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Very happy to be the new owner of this great guitar

It is in much better condition then what I was expecting. The pictures on the Ebay posting really did not do it justice. I took this picture and you can see she looks great!

The action is absolutely perfect and the neck joint is very strong. Certainly no need for a neck reset now or the foreseeable future. The one area of opportunity is with the wiring and pickups. The wiring loom is incorrect for a 1958 325. I will get this corrected to match V93. Also all three pickups have different readings. I will get these to match my other 1958 325's.

All in all, a truly wonderful instrument.

Josh

Looks great, Congrats!

Wow great guitar,
Hope you did not have to sell your house for it ). But.... Mobile homes are also very nice !

Congrats !!

Peter

Waoh!!

Not so much a little bit of Ric history, as a BIG bit of Ric history.

Congratulations ... and good luck with the restoration.

redamber wrote:Waoh!!

Not so much a little bit of Ric history, as a BIG bit of Ric history.

Congratulations ... and good luck with the restoration.

+1!

That's a beautiful guitar! Enjoy playing it as much as we enjoy seeing the pictures!

Congrats, Josh

It's a funny thing you know. It seems like only a few weeks ago in another forum that the buyer was adamant that this guitar was not V82, but was actually V84. It was said that he had seen internal marking proving that it was V84, and so V82 was still out there somewhere.

Now that Paul has purchased the guitar in question, we're expected to forget these "facts" that were being put around, and revert back to the the guitar being V82 afterall. It feels like the facts, yet again are just bent around to suit the owner. And I'm not talking about what the facts of the guitar may actually be, and what my belief may be. It's about what we're expected to believe, and what we're expected to forget.

glen_l wrote:It's a funny thing you know. It seems like only a few weeks ago in another forum that the buyer was adamant that this guitar was not V82, but was actually V84. It was said that he had seen internal marking proving that it was V84, and so V82 was still out there somewhere.

Now that Paul has purchased the guitar in question, we're expected to forget these "facts" that were being put around, and revert back to the the guitar being V82 afterall. It feels like the facts, yet again are just bent around to suit the owner. And I'm not talking about what the facts of the guitar may actually be, and what my belief may be. It's about what we're expected to believe, and what we're expected to forget.

I am very confused here Glen. I own the guitar, not Paul. Also, I have no recollection of ever saying this was V84. Can you perhaps supply me with a link or proof of that? In fact, I have always strongly felt this was V82.

If you are referring to the thread about this guitar at The BeatGear Cavern forum, the only member there that thought this may be V84 were members Karl and HofnersinLA. I do not recall Paul ever posting or saying this was V84.

I look forward to seeing where, "in another forum that the buyer was adamant that this guitar was not V82, but was actually V84."

Thank You,

Josh

There are enough references on the thread, not to mention people who received your discreet little emails ala

"....A little birdie told me to explore the "inner markings"/wiring of Hoover's 325, and compare to JWilli's V86...Doing so, found find it very similar and feel it is safe to presume that Hoover's 325 is most likely V84, not V82...."

to give a pretty clear indication who was saying what about the guitar.

glen_l wrote:There are enough references on the thread, not to mention people who received your discreet little emails ala

"....A little birdie told me to explore the "inner markings"/wiring of Hoover's 325, and compare to JWilli's V86...Doing so, found find it very similar and feel it is safe to presume that Hoover's 325 is most likely V84, not V82...."

to give a pretty clear indication who was saying what about the guitar.

So you are now suggesting that I emailed or sent messages to HofnersinLA (the forum member who made the remark above) and told him these things?

This is quite laughable Glen. I suggest in the future you get your facts correct before attempting to publicly defame me on a discussion forum. Did you perhaps reach out to HofnersinLA to confirm your assumption? Of course you didn't because he would have told you that no, I did not contact him in any way during the purchase of this guitar. In fact the only people I contacted during this purchase process were JWilli and Ron O'Keefe as I completely trust their opinions about 58 325's. As you know, both of those gentlemen own and have held 58 325's in their hands and closely examined them, as have I. This is still something I do not believe you have ever had the opportunity to do? I could be wrong, however I do not think so.

I also do not understand why you would come in to this thread and post such a negative statement? I started this thread to celebrate V82. I am very excited to own it and going forward more and more pictures of it will be posted. It is just such a negative and spiteful action to take. I have never understood your constant hostility toward me? It really is very childish.

I think at this point, the mature action for you to take is to admit you made some very wild assumptions in your original post in this thread and publicly apologize for your mistake.

So let me ask this. Why is it crazy to think that V93 would be a good reference point to get V82's wiring correct? Lets remember that V81, V82 and V93 were all modified to 4 pot looms and sent to Germany together in 1958. My goal is to get V82 wired as it was in 1958 when it went to Germany. V93 serves as the perfect reference for this as the wiring is untouched since then.

Then there is the issue of the pickup readings on V82. One is 3.5k, one is 9.5k and one is 7k. Having owned V109 and currently V93 and V101, all have middle and bridge output at 5k and bridge output at 8k. This is also the same story for JWilli's V86. Given all of this consistent data, I think it is a safe assumption to make that these are the proper readings for a 58 325. Again, I see no reason why it should be a big deal to rewind the pickups to proper original specs.

Yawn.

sloop_john_b wrote:Yawn.

I agree, let's stop giving this guy attention.

Lesson in life..... "never take yourself too seriously"