Neck Dimensions 4001 vs 4003 vs 4004

edski · Post by **edski** » Tue May 24, 2005 12:27 am

A little while ago, someone asked about the width of the 4004 neck at the 20th fret. I offered an answer from memory, and I don't think anyone contradicted it.

Well, I have a bad memory...

Found my small ruler this morning on my desk, and the Laredo is out of it's case so I put it up to the guitar...at the 20th fret the Laredo's width is almost 2 1/2 inches.

I'm guessing the 2 1/8" I spouted about is from my 4001 - but that guitar is not here now (at the rehearsal studio) so I can't check.

Since it's here, I measured the other pertinent dimensions of the Laredo:

Nut - 1 11/16"
Circumference at nut - 3 3/16"
Width at 12th fret - 2 1/4"
Circumference at 12th fret - 3 3/8"

The term "circumference" is a little bit of sloppy nomenclature, as the profiles are not at all circular, but I think it's pretty obvious what I mean...

I'd be interested if others could report the measurements for their basses. I know from playing other older Ricks that the neck dimensions varied (at least with the older 4001's). It would be cool to see some hard numbers describin the variation, and see perhaps if the more modern Ricks are more consistent...

haw · Post by **haw** » Tue May 24, 2005 1:02 am

Are all 4003 necks really chunky?

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Tue May 24, 2005 2:21 am

Ed, could you give the measures in cm, please?
So we can compare, as my wife only has a band measure for tailoring in cm.

I would really be keen on comparisons as I suspect quite a few differences to the "official" Rick specs.

edski · Post by **edski** » Tue May 24, 2005 2:44 am

Roughly (1" = 2.54 cm) converted measurements:

Nut Width = 4.3 cm
Nut Circ = 8.1 cm
12th Width = 5.7 cm
12th Circ = 8.6 cm
20th Width = 6.4 cm

My measurements for the circumferences was a wire twist tie...probably not the most accurate, but I think for these purposes we can ignore a little measurement slop (no need to go to the thousanth of an inch!).

Yeah, I suspect the "official" numbers are not too close. First of all, at least the older 4001's were pretty variable, and second the RIC site states the same dimensions for the 4003 as the 4004 regarding the widths...which is evidently not true.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Tue May 24, 2005 3:15 am

I have an 81 4003 and also a 96 4003 and the necks are not "chunky" at all. My 2000 is a little thicker but I still would not call it chunky it's comfortable and plays very well. All Rics are a little different due to hand finishing.

haw · Post by **haw** » Tue May 24, 2005 3:42 am

Hmmm, as opposed to a c64 neck there is a difference though?
And if I was going for a 4003, you'd reccommend something pre-2000, perhaps?

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Tue May 24, 2005 5:02 am

Many people think they got a bit thicker around 1997, I feel some difference but it is not a huge difference for me. I have one of the flat necked basses, a 1972 and prefer them a little thicker, a lot of people here like the flat necked ones. I wouldn't avoid a new 4003 because of the neck differences. I think they are the best sounding and playing Rics ever made.

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Wed May 25, 2005 8:37 am

Hi Ed,

here are my measures:

´98 4003
4.1cm width at nut
12.4cm circ at nut
5.4cm 12th width
13.6cm 12th circ
5.8cm 20th width

and now: "the winner is...!!!"
´95 4004L
4.4cm width at nut
12.7cm circ at nut
5.9cm 12th width
14.3cm 12th circ
6.4cm 20th width

... I HAVE THE THICKEST!!!

edski · Post by **edski** » Wed May 25, 2005 9:13 am

Thanks Peter!

I'm not sure we're making the same measurement for the circuference, probably because I didn't explain my self well...

I was referring to JUST the "circumference" around the back of the neck, but I think the difference would just be subtracting out the "width"...

Again, not sure I'm making myself clear...anyway, applying my "correction", it seems that the three necks are about the same in terms of "chunk", and the 4004 neck is clearly wider.

I'm going to rehearsal tonight, so I'll do a measurement on the 1975 4001...I'm pretty sure it's not nearly as "chunky"...

morrow · Post by **morrow** » Wed May 25, 2005 11:59 am

I have an 80 4001 and was comparing necks with a friends 4003 last week and was surprised how close they were.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed May 25, 2005 12:59 pm

What year was the 4003? My 81 and 96 4003's are very close also.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Wed May 25, 2005 4:35 pm

If you ever get a chance to play a 60's ric bass do ... the necks feel really good ... 70's 4001 basses are a little slimmer than the modern 4003 ... the slimmest 4003 that I have played was a 93 4003s ... the v63 neck is pretty much the same as a 4003 ... the 4001c64 has a neck that is a little slimmer than a 4003 ... the 4004 neck starts out the same at the nut but is a little wider at the 20th fret ... that neck tapers a little like a fender style neck ... the 4003s5 a neck that is a little fatter than the 4003 ... the 2030 neck is like a jazz bass neck ...the 2020 neck is like a 4004 neck ...

my favorite neck ... my old 68 ... but it was a little weak ... I like my 4003, 4004, 2020, and 2030 necks ... they vary somewhat but they are comfortable ... I am liking my 4004L5 a lot these days ... it feels and sounds good ...

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Wed May 25, 2005 9:39 pm

...Ed, you are right, I always measured the whole circumference, including the fingerboard as differences in the thickness of the fingerboards also contribute to the chunkyness. Anyway looking forward to the 4004Cii, I recently bought from Mark Henson, to compare the necks and select the most suitable bass, also in terms of the neck PU position.

edski · Post by **edski** » Thu May 26, 2005 12:34 am

That's another aspect of a guitar's geometry I consider important...PU placement. I think Mark's Cii (yours now, I guess

Congrats!) will be very similar to my Laredo...75% and 90% (roughtly) of the scale length, measured from the nut...my 4001 I thnk is about the same (forgot to measure that aspect last night) based on some pictures I have.

Back to necks...I did the measurements on the 4001 last night (a 1975) and got these:

Nut width - 1 5/8" (4.1 cm)
Nut circ - 3 3/8" (8.6 cm)
* Significant development of headstock here...
1st Fret width - 1 5/8" (4.1 cm)
1st fret circ - 2 5/8 (6.7 cm)
12th Fret width - 2 1/16" (5.2 cm)
12th fret circ - 3 1/16" (7.8 cm)
20th Fret width - 2 3/16" (5.6 cm)

The Headstock on the 4001 starts to form well before the nut...so maybe the best place to measure the "chunk" would be the first fret...and my "circumference" is really the "half circumference". Well sort of. I think you understand!

The 4004 is downstairs right now...and I'm not motivated at 6:30 AM EDT to check the 1st fret "circumference"...but it would certainly be more than on the 4001. Clearly the 70's neck is narrower and less thick than the more recent 4004's and 4003.

Would be interesting to see some more numbers from the 70's 4001's out there. I think there might be some variations, but maybe they're more consistent than I think. After all, I've only had one...

cheyenne · Post by **cheyenne** » Thu May 26, 2005 1:13 am

One more minor item I'd like to add. I've primarilay been playing my 4003 at gigs the last few months, and this past weekend I picked up my 4004 CII, and for some reason, really noticed the weight difference. Never really notice it before, but the CII is considerably lighter than the 4003's I own.