Rickenbacker necks are like Grahams G's belly, they just get bigger and bigger as time goes on!
Occasionally they lose some thickness though (which unfortunately will never happen with Graham)
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Jeff, my S/5 is from Jan-97. I also prefer a fatter, but with the tone and playability of that bass, I can't resist playing it.rickaddict wrote:What year is your S/5, Joey? My '89 S/5 has your typical small late 80's neck. My 2000 S/5 has a chunky neck like the 4003's made at the time. For a 5-string, I prefer the fatter neck. I think RIC just used a 4003 neck slab and put an elongated head wing on top to accommodate the extra tuner.
I agree with your skepticism though. In a perfect world, the same person would use the same tape measure and the same methods to measure all of the different bass necks. Many of the measurements were my own basses and a few others were somebody else's basses, measured by me. Those ones have consistent measuring methods and the same measuring tape. So its a less than perfect sample of info, but I think it makes its point.
Sam, I also thought that the S/5 had the same as the S/4, just seems funny that my S/5 has a smaller girth than a couple of 4 stringers on the list.basmansam wrote:I thought the S5's had the same neck as the S4's, only with 5 strings.
LOL!!leftyguitars wrote: Rickenbacker necks are like Grahams G's belly, they just get bigger and bigger as time goes on!
Occasionally they lose some thickness though (which unfortunately will never happen with Graham)
I'll bet! Someone HAD to beat my 2004!sloop_john_b wrote:Positively tickled that my v68 has the thickest neck (so far, anyway).
sloop_john_b wrote:Positively tickled that my v68 has the thickest neck (so far, anyway).