4003 tailpiece bending up

tsarter · Post by **tsarter** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:38 am

You're right Owen. That's pretty extreme. I'd still probably hold off until it is absolutely necessary, but I generally don't fix anything until I have to. Which reminds me I have some dry rot behind my kitchen sink to deal with...

Tim

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:30 am

I have emailed The guy at the music connection , but i have not got a reply, does he not work weekends?

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:43 am

Mike is a little slow responding to e-mails ...

I generally call him and place the order ... the phone number is on the web site ... I generally call mon to fri 9 to 5

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:58 am

lol i would call but im in the UK - expensive - email is free!

Do you think if i just place an order online he will get it soon?

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:36 am

Sure ...

seeing it is a Holiday he probably won't respond today

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 6:39 am

This thread is in regard to a '91 bass. With very high tension strings, i.e. those with high iron content like Rotosounds, the tailpiece on these older instruments will bend forward as much as 5mm. This is strictly a cosmetic issue and has no effect on the playability of the instrument. Use a normal tension string and it will sit back down nicely.

Sometime about 1994-95, the ribbing on the back of the plate was changed to beef it up a bit and it's now rare to see this but when you do, again it's just a matter of extreme tension.

In the 50's and early 60's, these tailpieces were cast from aluminum which was quite soft. As a result they bent like crazy, killed sustain, and were very easy to damage. The chrome plating simply fell off or was worn away most of the time. The part was updated to die cast zinc, an expensive but high precision process. (It REALLY pisses me off when people call our parts "pot metal" which is a different, cheap material/process where powdered metal is molded then sintered or melted together in an oven). Die casting is so very expensive by comparison but it's also very strong and very durable.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 7:33 am

Was brass ever considered for the tailpiece?

Also I really don't have a problem drilling holes and adding screws to my Rics for this type of problem. I'd rather see extra screws than a pulled up tail piece.

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 7:46 am

Mr. Hall - thanks for clearing this up for me - as i have only just bought the bass, i have no idea of its past, im guessing its previous owner used very heavy strings. I use what i would consider normal/standard tension.

As you stated that the tailpiece design has now been "beefed up", i shall obtain a new one and take care to use normal tension strings.

Could someone here answer this? : If you take a roundwound Stainless steel string set, and a roundwound Nickel Plated steel string set, both of guage 45 65 85 105, and both of the same make (ie Rotosound) - will the stainless strings put more tension on my bass?

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:06 am

The the tension of a stainless steel will be about 5% less for any given set versus nickel. That's just approximate as string construction and alloys vary considerably.

With an additional $40,000-50,000 investment in dies and perhaps double the unit parts price, not to mention significant extra instrument weight, brass isn't particularly attractive to us. It'd be easier to plate though.

jeff_ulmer · Post by **jeff_ulmer** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:46 am

I'm curious about the bridge on the CS then, as mine (a '99) still has the factory strings on it, and is detuned a semitone, yet is still lifting (though I couldn't honestly tell you that it was ever flat to the body). It has about the same relief as my '74 4001, which isn't using particularly heavy strings and is also detuned.

Was the CS based on the vintage bridge without reinforcements? My 5 and 8 string basses both have additional, factory screws in the back.

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:49 am

i dunno, i reckon as long as ya tailpiece aint like mine, its ok

Mines like a banana!

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:51 am

im getting a replacement, tho i cant seem to get a reply from the guy at music connection yet.......

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:00 am

here's a great idea for a nitche market Rickenbacker add on ...

A better tailpiece/bridge that won't bend up and is easier to adjust and has a greater adjustment length for intonation and no stupid mute ... not some force fit leo quan thing with a plastic surround ...

It should fit the same footprint and use the same screw holes and look good ...

bigbajo60 · Post by **bigbajo60** » Mon Apr 21, 2003 7:51 pm

I imagine that such a retrofit bridge would require licensing arrangements between RIC and any potential maker/marketer.

However, this probably would be a part that would have a ready-made market judging by all the posts.

I wonder... is the current bridge unit made on "in house" machinery, or is the machining "farmed out"?

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:03 am

Anyway, lucky the music connection has the black tailpiece in stock, so my bass will soon be "proper"

Rick parts are hard to get tho........3 months back order if you need the bridge saddle plate