The first responder was someone who's owned many Ricks and, based on his experience, has stated that 4001's are nice for collectors but for playing 4003's are better basses than 4001's. He went on to ask, why should someone pay more for a 30+ year old bass when they could buy a new and better improvement of the same design.
I've owned and played Rick's since the early 80's. I've had my 72' 4001(center of pic) since 82' and have owned three different 74' 4001's, my current one being the Walnut(left of pic) and have been in possession of a 81' 4001 for about 11 years.
These three Ricks in the picture all have very distinctly different feels to them. I'd have to say that most newer Ricks that I've played feel closer to the 81' than the earlier ones.
I'm having a hard time accepting the statement that 4003's are actually superior to 4001's.
I'm familiar with the Trussrod upgrade in 4003's but I have not seen if the change in the Trussrod goes beyond adding washers between the adjustment nut and the Blank.
In some of these 4001's I've replaced the Metal Blank with Brass. The need being the adjustment nuts cutting into the blank material and also the Trussrod cutting into the material from the back, both actions reducing the amount of control over Neck Relief you have.
I also know that there were other design changes to provide greater strength and stability to the necks of 4003's, I just don't know what these changes consisted of. Which leads to another issue I have with the supposed 4003 superiority, is that I've never experienced any lack of complete solidity in quality or design of any 4001's I've owned or played.
Any information or constructive feedback would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks
(please disregard any non-Ricks in the pic-thanks)
