What year & model Ricks have the thinnest necks

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

User avatar
ben_brown
Advanced Member
Posts: 2503
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 am

Post by ben_brown »

Well the nut could stand to be a bit lower. I remember when I got the frets leveled on my Tele bass the nut was tweaked as well and it played like butter when I got it back. The neck on the 4003 is flat and I lowered the bridge a tad but I get a lot of fret buzz and it's no where as low as the F*nder which does not buzz. I'm afraid of adjusting the truss rods though. She currently has Rick strings on her.
'73 4001 MG '88 4003S JG '89 4003S FG '91 4003S MG
User avatar
ben_brown
Advanced Member
Posts: 2503
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 am

Post by ben_brown »

Thanks Steve...I totally agree!
'73 4001 MG '88 4003S JG '89 4003S FG '91 4003S MG
jwr2

Post by jwr2 »

I have played one 4001c64 ... it was in the 2002 2005 range ... the neck was noticeably slimmer ... still fatter than a 4003 for the same era ... the one 4001cs that I played had a slimmer neck ... I also played a 4003s from about 90-93 range it had a sweet neck ... on the whole the 73-84 4001 basses seem to have a slightly slimmer neck than many 4003 basses ...
rickfan60
Senior Member
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:00 am

Post by rickfan60 »

Thanks for the kind words Jack. Image I am sure there is a factory standard for setups but there will always be some variation. After the fact, temperature, humidity, and the tendencies of the wood will usually make further adjustments necessary.
jmh
Member
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by jmh »

I can hopefully compensate for normal neck variations now. Before, it was a losing battle I didn't know how to correct for. I'm guessing the nut and saddle adjustments finally brought the E string back to it's correct height and arc with the neck, as well as going to a lighter gauge and great sounding string. I also have no idea if the bridge pickup was at the correct height.
If it ain't broke, break it, then fix it.
zoomduck
Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:07 pm

Post by zoomduck »

Before I broke both wrists I was playing these 5 strings.... Dingwall , Spector , Reverend and a 64 P Bass . Large necks on all of them.....My 77 AG 4001 feels pencil thin by comparison , even thinner than my Fender Jazz !
More throttle...Less brakes
User avatar
jnbass
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 5359
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2001 7:58 am

Post by jnbass »

A 2004 C64 was the 'slimist' neck I have ever not played.

Then the V63, CS.

this one felt the thickest...
Image
Buy it before someone else does
jwr2

Post by jwr2 »

I said ...

"I have played one 4001c64 ... it was in the 2002 2005 range ... the neck was noticeably slimmer ... still fatter than a 4003 for the same era"

I meant to say slimmer than a 4003 from the same era ...
User avatar
johnallg
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 17688
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:13 pm

Post by johnallg »

I wondered about that, Jeff, when I read it. Thanks for clarifying. Never having held a c64, I wasn't sure but it went against what I have read. The world is still round.
User avatar
ben_brown
Advanced Member
Posts: 2503
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 am

Post by ben_brown »

That's what I thought you meant to say.
'73 4001 MG '88 4003S JG '89 4003S FG '91 4003S MG
User avatar
ben_brown
Advanced Member
Posts: 2503
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 am

Post by ben_brown »

...and Jared said "A 2004 C64 was the 'slimist' neck I have ever not played."

NOT played?
'73 4001 MG '88 4003S JG '89 4003S FG '91 4003S MG
User avatar
4003
Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 5:00 am

Post by 4003 »

My basses in order of descending "fatness"...

1997 4001CS
1993 4003
2005 4004LK
1986 4003
1967 4001

My CS definitely has the chunkiest neck. I have not had the opportunity to play the 1967 4001 yet, but I was shocked how thin the neck felt before I shipped it off to Paul W. for him to work his magic. These opinions are based on the scientific term "feel" and have not been verified with measurements!
User avatar
jnbass
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 5359
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2001 7:58 am

Post by jnbass »

"not played"

I guy named Jaymi used to give me (goodhearted) cr_p for not regularly playing out my basses. Therefore my playing along with CDs doesn't qualify as "actual" playing.

I think part of the sensation of that C64 neck was the satin finish along the back. Since I used to be a J_zz bass guy, my 4003 neck kinda felt like a Louisville Slugger...

IMHO
Buy it before someone else does
clankchris
Member
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:43 pm

Post by clankchris »

Mine's an '03 4003, but the neck of my P bass feels much more clunkier - I actually love neck of my 4003Image

I hope they don't get too thin - I almost never have to adjust the truss rods on my 4003, and I live in Florida..Image
zoomduck
Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:07 pm

Post by zoomduck »

Yeah....that's another thing....the skinny neck on my 77 is Rock Solid . Truss rods took one adjustment when I bought it and she has'nt changed through 3 different sets of strings ! Too bad it has that horrible binding that caused the purchase of a 4004 Cii . Soon as I finish the the toaster conversion on the Cii I will send the 77 to the bay .
More throttle...Less brakes
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe”