Making A Rickenbacker

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 12:58 pm

This question is for John Hall. I am wondering how much time is spent crafting a Rickenbacker. It would be interesting to know what proportion of this time is spent on wood, finishing, buffing, electronics, and hardware.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:24 am

Obviously this varies considerably by model, but for a typical 330, about 25% is wood shop, 65% is finish and only about 10% in assembly. Three weeks is just about the fastest anything can be made (oil finish instrument), and six weeks the longest (i.e. a Model 381).

corey · Post by **corey** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:09 pm

Wow. It's neat to know how long the model 381 takes to make. The extra time invested is definitely noticeable in the finished product.

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:20 pm

Reminds me of the 381 V69 Fireglo I purchased for the band I was producing in summer 2001.
Objet d'art, absolutely!

rkbsound · Post by **rkbsound** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:18 pm

I was recently in a guitar shop that had two halves of a Rick 360 or 330 - I can't remember which - and it was really interesting to see the actual neck to body joint area. Not that this has anything to do with this topic!

In any case it was unfinished, and in this form it is easy to appreciate the work that goes into producing the final product. Are these cut-aways available? I would imagine they are not, but one can always ask!

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 2:22 pm

Obviously, in the 30 + years since I worked in the Rick woodshop, production methods have been upgraded, made safer, and more efficient. But even then, in '72, when almost everything I saw come out of the woodshop was a 4001[thanks, Chris Squire...], if we started a new batch of 4001s on a Monday, it was not impossible that by the end of the week we could have as many as 35-50 bass body/w neckthrough ready to send to the handsanding dept. to get "fine tuned" before the painters would take over.And the factory has more on their hands now, because they make not just mainly one model that most of the energy is concentrated on, but several different models.
The finish Is the most time consuming, but Rick has one of the nicest quality finishes in the business.

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 5:50 pm

Thanks for the breakdown John.

Agreed Don, the finish on Rickenbackers is superb and the fact that nearly two-thirds of the manufacturing time is spent on it sure tells. It surely is time well spent. I appreciate that finishes have changed substantially over the years, however, I must say that the finish on my 1966 Model 450/12 continues to be of the highest quality as it approaches its four decade.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 8:01 am

It appears that there have been a number of changes in the finish of Rickenbackers since the 1960s. I notice that the mapleglo finish on my 1993 Model 350 appears much thicker than that of the Fireglo finish on my 1966 Model 450/12.

While the appearance of the 1993 mapleglo finish may be quite different from the firelgo 1966 finish because of the grain effect, does anyone know just how much thicker the newer finishes are? By this I mean is the finish and clear coat combined twice as thick for example.

Moreover, is the finish somewhat thicker today beause the finishes used are less durable than in days gone by? Have the number of finish coats changed over the years?

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 11:27 am

Today's finishes are far and away the thinnest ever, less than 10 mils overall. This is done for a variety of reasons, the primary one being that a thin finish is more resistant to cracking.

The number of coats has indeed varied as the processing necessary to get a 95+ finish with any given material varies greatly. However, for many years now it's been 11 coats (except for Mapleglo which has only 10 since it has no color coat).

The early 1990's were probably some of the thickest years due to the incoming air quality regulations outpacing the availability of quality compliant finishing materials.

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 3:57 am

John Hall wrote Quote:"The number of coats has indeed varied as the processing necessary to get a 95+ finish with any given material varies greatly."John, would you be able to elaborate on this with regard to walnut, maple and mahogany. Also, I am sure the humidity in the wood is a factor. How do you determine when a piece of wood is acceptable to receive a finish coat or stain?

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:58 am

The wood moisture content is not a factor in the finishing process but relative to wood cracking. In our factory, we try to keep the air at least 35% which ends up with the wood in the 6.5 to 7% range. Here in Southern California, there's little chance through the year of it being more humid long enough to affect the wood moisture.

If we were working with Walnut and Mahogany exclusively, we'd probably need more moisture but right now we gear everything for the Maple and the other woods take care of themselves.