Broken "R" tailpiece

gypsy_dave · Post by **gypsy_dave** » Thu Jun 05, 2003 5:56 pm

Well I opened my case a few days ago to find my immaculate 381/12 looking well dejected. The problem the "R" tailpiece has broken clean in two, at the bottom where it hooks over the strap button fitting.
Q1. How ****** is that? Come on Rickenbacker, this guitar is only about 5 years old, in immaculate condition.
Q2. Where can I get one fast, to Sydney, Australia? The local dealers are having trouble sourcing one, and charging the earth.

ANYONE AT RICKENBACKER do the decent thing and send me a new one, it's a fault that only Rickenbacker can be blamed for surely.

ANYONE else... any ideas dudes?

Cheers, Gypsy Dave.

wileyibex · Post by **wileyibex** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 5:17 am

One possibility would be to replace the broken "R" tailpiece with the "trapeze-" style tailpiece. It's less expensive and, because the bottom of the 'piece's string slots is enclosed, should make restringing far quicker and less subject to the muttering of dark oaths. The Trapeze tailpiece is available as a replacement part directly from RIC, or from any of several Ric dealers.

kennyhowes · Post by **kennyhowes** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 6:38 am

David - is your guitar under warranty?

grsnovi · Post by **grsnovi** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 6:56 am

Kenny -

At the risk of offering an unwanted opinion, I suggest to you that a cast metal part such as the R tailpiece that does not last for the life of the instrument had faulty material and OUGHT to be replaced by RIC.

There have been too many "exploding" R stories for me to believe that there is not some inherent flaw in the casting process or materials used by the supplier of these parts.

While one could ask: if I get 1 bad one for every 1000 good ones, should the customer be subjected to: its out of warranty - there's nothing we can do.

Its not a particularly friendly implication.

It'd be one thing if the guitar was a Pete Townsend destructo act and the R broke but most of the stories I've heard just have these things breaking while in the case.

All of that said, GYPSY DAVE did you at least send mail directly to RIC before airing your problem in public? and suggesting that they would NOT do the decent thing?

RIC doesn't cast these parts. Statistically, if there is 1 bad for every 1000 they purchase, its not their fault.

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:02 am

Gypsy Dave: You have not mentioned whether you have contacted the Service Department at Rickenbacker. RIC is as interested in these issues as much as anyone out there.

Having said that, a "craddle to grave" warranty for a part such as this that is under considerable tension and subject to wear is unrealistic. The good news is that it did not let go while you were performing or restringing it, sending shattered parts across the room.

I appreciate that the price tag of about about $85US does sting, particularly when you add shipping and taxes. Another reason to send off an email to the Service Department at RIC.

Please let us know how you make out.

ricnvolved · Post by **ricnvolved** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 10:05 am

Paul Franklin's suggestion of replacing the broken 'R' tailpiece with the trapeze style is the best thing you can do.

gypsy_dave · Post by **gypsy_dave** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 5:54 pm

Thanks to all who responded. You have been very helpful, as has Tommy at RIC's service department.
Yes I did contact RIC service first, and have heard back, they are helpful, but as the guitar was made a tad over five years ago I think they are going to charge for a replacement if I go that way.
Gary, read my mail again man, nowhere did I "suggest" RIC wouldn't do the decent thing. In fact I kind of expect they would I mean this guitar is worth a small fortune, good customer service is worth lots to a company... isn't it?However it does look like they want to charge a customer for something that is surely a suppliers fault. Bad in my book. I mean this guitar got treated better than my family

It is spotless. I bet RIC can get replacements for bad castings from their supplier for free. Why not pass that on to guys like me that obviously had a badly cast piece?

grsnovi · Post by **grsnovi** » Sat Jun 07, 2003 7:52 am

Gypsy Dave -

I read your post. I suppose it can be read in a number of ways? To me, when you say:

"ANYONE AT RICKENBACKER do the decent thing and send me a new one, it's a fault that only Rickenbacker can be blamed for surely."

And capitalize the first three words, follwed by "do the decent thing" seems to suggest that you don't expect them to - otherwise why air such a statement in a public forum such as this?

Knowing full well that the CEO of the company reads this board?

I have no quarrel with you - I am going to be REALLY ****** if the R on my 370/12 explodes.

EVER!

If it does - it will only be due to a design flaw or fluke of cast material grain structure - in which case, there are enough of them failing that (here we are back again) the design is flawed based on the selected material and manufacturing process for the intended use of the component.

G

ps - BTW, I think the R tailpiece is very cool and much more appealing than the trapeze - although the trapeze is much easier to string and not prone to exploding

corey · Post by **corey** » Sat Jun 07, 2003 10:06 am

Gary,

I agree with you on your thoughts on the coolness of the "R" tailpiece over the Trapeze. I think we're in the minority on this, but that's fine.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Jun 07, 2003 2:59 pm

Corey and Gary: I would think that you are in the majority when it comes to the coolness of the "R" tailpiece.

The "R" tailpiece is a highly identifiable feature if not an Icon for the Rickenbacker line.

I chose the trapeze for my Model 350 as it harkened to earlier days. As with many of these Rickenbacker decisions it comes down to the functional versus the aesthetic or as you say the "coolness factor."

grsnovi · Post by **grsnovi** » Sat Jun 07, 2003 4:34 pm

I never suggested that I thought the desireability factor on the "R" was low. I agree that it is most certainly a highly visible and unique iconic representation of RIC guitars since its introduction.

I don't much care for stringing it... 12 string style. But then again, I don't much care for stringin' the trapeze on my new ES-5 either.

corey · Post by **corey** » Sun Jun 08, 2003 9:56 am

Peter: I guess the "statistics" that float around in my head are skewed because of the C series and a lot of folks who, like yourself, want those touches from yesteryear. I'm not one to frequent music stores either, so I really don't know what "the kids" are thinking today.

If Peter Buck and Susanna Hoffs had played Rics with the trapeze, I'm sure I would think differently. First impressions are like tattoos.

ricnvolved · Post by **ricnvolved** » Sun Jun 08, 2003 11:02 am

No doubt about it, the 'R' tailpiece has it all over the trapeze in spades as far as the coolness factor. But in this instance, I prefer the hassle-free functionality the trapeze affords.

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Mon Jun 09, 2003 7:07 pm

I have to disagree here about Rickenbacker's responsibility. I wouldn't dream of asking any manufacturer to replace something out of warranty unless it was a part that had already had problems during the warranty period.

Rickenbacker's warranty is pretty generous. Fender's "Lifetime Limited Warranty" excludes hardware (and many other items) after one year.

In any case, if you feel a manufacturer's warranty is inadequate, you shouldn't buy the product at all.

360dave · Post by **360dave** » Mon Jun 09, 2003 9:28 pm

Thanks Miguel...I was trying to keep my mouth shut.
You said it much better that I ever could.