Bring back the 4003-S

cheyenne · Post by **cheyenne** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:05 am

What do you guys and gals think? Seems like a good idea to me. Just a good old fashioned bare boned "standard" model

basshawk · Post by **basshawk** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:08 am

I would like that.

rumbush · Post by **rumbush** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:18 am

+1
...with a normal headstock orientation.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:28 am

I'd like that a lot. Not even a 4001 reissue or anything, just a modern 4003s with higains, push/pull, walnut wings, etc.

chucksimms · Post by **chucksimms** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:47 am

The only bass I've had that I wish I'd kept: my '89 4003S FG. Best neck EVER.

cheyenne · Post by **cheyenne** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:58 am

I've been thinking of putting in an order for a new Rick but I have 4 nice 4003's.

I'll probably order a Larado just for something different, but I just wish the "S" series was still an option for us, especially now with the walnut wings..

Im not slamming RIC or anything,,but I wish we bassist's had a few more choices.

I guess you always want what you cant have.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:19 am

I'd rather see them put a 5 stringer back on the market or something completely new. There are plenty of options used to get what you want......C64, V63 or a 4003s. They pop up often enough that it wouldn't be that hard to find one. I view it as taking a step back....just my opinion.

A Laredo with a p/u change and a custom pickguard would fill the void and you'd have a "one of a kind". You could even route it out to put in the 4001/4003 bridge p/u and surround and a 4003 tailpiece if you want.

alanz · Post by **alanz** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:20 am

I dunno; as we all know the "Dee Lux" 4003 is the bass that Zeus intended, I'm not sure we should take a chance at angering the Gods on Olympus by bringing back the 4003S.

bob_atherton · Post by **bob_atherton** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:24 am

The only RIC that I gig with at the moment is my '73 4000. Does that count as an S ?

cheyenne · Post by **cheyenne** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:24 am

Im even considering a C64.

What is a ballpark price for one of these?

I know they list $3Kish.

alan · Post by **alan** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:32 am

I like the binding, especially on the neck. When the day arrives and I finally have a 4004, I'm concerned the lack of neck binding might put me off. Still, can't wait to see.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:03 pm

4004LK's have binding so just get one of those.

markbass99 · Post by **markbass99** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:18 pm

The 4004 is the "S" model of the future. High gains could be swapped in. Walnut wings are already there(can't see them through solid colors tho). Exotic wood grain tops would be nice and the bubinga fret boards are especially beautiful without binding. Optional maple fret boards and five string setups would be cool also. The possibilities for the light weight 4004 platform are numerous but as long as people keep ordering the other flavor I don't see any changes in the near future.....unless you do it yourself.

ajish4 · Post by **ajish4** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:43 pm

I love 'em all, but I like the "S" basses the best.

My 1988 V63 is almost my exclusive player. I did recently give in and got a C64S.

What I'd REALLY love to get is a Fretless "S" bass. On that note, I'm really surprised that a 4004FL isn't available yet. I'd order one in a heartbeat!

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 2:55 pm

4003S is my favorite Ric. I currently do not own one. Grrrr...