Buy a 4001 or a 4003?

liston · Post by **liston** » Thu Aug 08, 2002 11:57 pm

I'm about to buy my first rickenbacker. I basically have two options, a 1974 4001 or a brand new 4003. What is your general recomendations? What should I think about when I look at the 4001? What is the price range for a 1974 4001?

craigv · Post by **craigv** » Fri Aug 09, 2002 2:59 am

For the 4001, pay close attention to the neck and the neck/fingerboard joint. Most luthiers unfamiliar with the 4001 damaged the truss rods by overtightening them. This is evident by the neck/fingerboard joint splitting, and by mangled nuts & threads at the truss rods.

Other than the redesigned truss rods in the 4003, there's little difference between it and the 4001 (I agree with those who feel they should not have renamed the 4001). I had a new 4001 way back when, and I've got a new 4003 now. If it wasn't for the color difference, I'd be hard-pressed to see any real differences. Both are incredible instruments. The 4001 will most likely not be able to use roundwound strings; the 4003 will be fine with any string.

Having said that, my opinion is that you play both and get the one that speaks to you.

rickcrazy · Post by **rickcrazy** » Fri Aug 09, 2002 3:41 am

Well, I would go for the 1974 4001. I happen to have one which is an absolute dream - amazing sound, amazingly low action, no neck problems, a really charismatic 4001 bass. Having said that, I think Craig's recommendations are totally valid - the condition of some used Rick basses is not as good as might be hoped. Good luck.

gpatt5762 · Post by **gpatt5762** » Fri Aug 09, 2002 3:27 pm

Liston,

This is important:

Can you Hands-on examine the 4001?

If so, ask to remove the truss rod cover, and make sure it doesn't look like this.

If it does, DON'T!!

Garry

ricnbacker · Post by **ricnbacker** » Fri Aug 09, 2002 5:58 pm

mark,

i read your reply to the above link by Garry.

what state are you in ?

if you arent in the NY area, can you recommend a guitar tech around the albany area do set up my bass for me? i am just not comfortable "trying" for the first time on the only ric i have and the only one i will probably ever have

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Fri Aug 09, 2002 9:34 pm

sorry ,, I am in Washington state north of Seattle ...I have no idea who is in upstate New York.

banta · Post by **banta** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 4:41 pm

If the 4001 is in great shape and relatively inexpensive, I'd go for it. (The advice given by these guys on the neck is good.) Otherwise, a new 4003 is the way to go.

dougp · Post by **dougp** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 11:36 am

I'll just add that although the neck/fingerboard joint is an important thing to check (for evidence of trussrod adjustment attempts by the clueless), it's not necessarily a fatal flaw. My '78 4001, purchased about 5 years ago, has a split that goes about 1-1/2 frets down the neck. Since obtaining the bass, I've only had it worked on by people who knew what they were doing, and the split hasn't gotten any worse or been a problem in the 5 years I've owned it.

And it's actually useful for assessing a luthier's/tech's Rickenbacker bass knowledge: I point out the split and ask, "what caused that?" If the tech answers correctly, I know that he or she probably knows how to work on old Ric basses. If the tech gives the wrong answer, or doesn't know, I'll take my bass elsewhere.

FWIW I slightly prefer my '78 4001 to my early-90's 4003, but they're both great basses.

rickengrowl · Post by **rickengrowl** » Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:11 am

I also would go for the used 4001, depending on its condition, of course.

I had marvellous experiences with two 4001's, and a disappointing one with a recent 4003.

FWIW,

All the best,

Jean.