Opinions & ideas for restoring my 73 Autumnglo 4001

[Kopfjaeger]

Well, I landed it! After a bit of negotiating with the music shop owner on price and a long trip from England via Köln, it has finally arrived! I got a pretty good deal on it, or so I think, as the shop owner came down quite a bit from his eBay price.

The neck is nice and while I have not taken any measurements, I'd say it is very comparable to my 2011 4003. I noticed the head stock on the 73 does not arch rearward as much as my new 4003.

According the Ric site it's a May 1973. Is it possible to figure out if Autumglo was the original color the bass was finished in? As for the refinish question, no doubt but I think it was very nicely done. I'd like to get it back to it's original configuration, as much as possible. I have yet to open up the inside but that will
come in a few days.

I'd like to compile a list of items that need attention and rank them in order of importance and I'm hpoint you guys can steer me in the right direction.

The neck is as straight as an arrow and she plays quite well. Here are a few of the issues I have noticed. The bridge has a bit of tail lift. I guess the older bridges bent under the strain of the strings? I suppose there is nothing that can be done to fix this? Is this amount of lift excessive? Is this the original bridge? If the lift is excessive, is a better option to put a new 7 screw bridge in it's place? By the two other filled screw holes, This may have had a hip shot installed at one time. I can't see any routing under the bridge.

The bridge/string adjustment screw is screwed up. I'll need to replace one of the hex screws, the hex section is stripped and the end id ******** up.

The pick up toggle switch needs to be changed. I can get these at Pick of the Ricks.

It retains two of the Wavy Grover tuners and it has two replacements with no wave on the machine head.

The truss rod bolts look a bit close to the back of the wood cavity. Brown paint is all over the threaded ends and aluminum block.

Is the pick guard original??

The bridge pick up has the slotted pole pieces that have been screwed out a bit. Do these adjust this way like my 4003??

That's about all from the outside. Did I miss anything??

Sepp

[Kopfjaeger]

Here are four more fotos.

Sepp

[Kopfjaeger]

OK, I answered my own question on the bridge. It's a newer version. I can't figure out why I have tail lift on a 5 screw bridge??? I'll pull the bridge off to see what the deal is. Whether the bridge is bent or the area of the bass is not level.

If It's the bridge and I opt for an older 3 screw, how easy is it to bend the bridge?? I'll be putting a set of balanced .106 set of Circle K's on her so I know the tension will not be a factor.

Tried at the Hardware store to find a stainless 6 32 set screw that is 5/8 long to replace the ******** up bridge height adjuster. No luck. Next stop, Home depot.

Sepp

[badeggs]

Beautiful bass! I got a few answers for you...

-The zinc tailpieces (which you have one of here) are the very ones with the "problem," so it's normal to have some lift. The older aluminum (three-screw) tailpieces don't lift. Though, as you noted, if the bass isn't dead-level it'll appear to lift no matter what! Both my basses have aluminum tailpieces that appear to lift a bit, probably for this very reason...the zinc variety seems to first appear in May of 73, so yours could be the original, but those screw holes probably indicate a replacement at one point. It could also be a new one - if you take it off and look at the bottom you should be able to tell. There's a pic on the forum somewhere of the undersides of aluminum, older zinc and current zinc tailpieces showing their differences. A seven-screw tailpiece would be hard to come by, they weren't around too long (1980s)...

-The poles on the hi-gain aren't meant to be adjustable, and should ideally be screwed down all the way. But if the pickup works I'd suggest you leave them alone (turning them may tear the windings in the pickup).

-The pickguard is original, though the knobs are replacements (they're 60s-style Rick knobs, but this would have originally had the deluxe foil-top knobs).

-You have two wavy Grovers and two flat Grovers! Interesting combination, this would most-likely have originally had the wavys. Flats were from a few years earlier, and again are hard to find. You may know that these tuners are, shall we say, "delicate" and quite a few early 70s 4001s have had these replaced as a result.

[badeggs]

Here's that photo:

Classic aluminum on the left, older zinc in the middle, and a newer zinc on the right. Note how the newer tailpieces have a little more "meat" to them, but nothing compared to that solid aluminum block!

If It's the bridge and I opt for an older 3 screw

Ha good luck! You should know these rarely come up, they're very expensive (usually on ebay for $400-$600) and you need the aluminum bridge as well, as the bridge in a zinc tailpiece won't fit an aluminum tailpiece. You're better off buying a new one or trying one of the fixes for "un-bending" a lifted tailpiece - search the forum, there's different threads describing the processes you can use.

[Kopfjaeger]

Badeggs,

Thanks for the very useful info! Small world, Shrewsbury is not all that far from me! Wow, so the bridge may very well be original to the bass, that is good news. So if I can't get the bend out of the bridge, the new 5 hole bridge would be easiest to put in. By the foot print on the foto you sent, it looks like it may be a drop in, is that the case?

For right now the tuners all work and hold a tune. I guess I should keep an eye out for a set of wavey Grovers! Does anyone rebuild them?? I'll also keep an eye out for a set of foil top knobs.

I'll open her up a little later for some more fotos and post them here.

One more question, the wedge shaped string adjustment pieces, how much of a groove is acceptable? It seems the E string has quite a deep groove cut in it.

Stay tuned and thanks!!

Sepp

[badeggs]

Just to keep all the terminology straight: the bridge is the rectangular piece of metal that the strings ride over (and those "wedge shaped string adjustment pieces" are saddles), It's the tailpiece that's bent! A new tailpiece should drop right in, pretty sure all the holes line up the same.

Keep in mind that the whole "tailpiece lift" thing is a somewhat-contentious issue...some here (like me) don't really think it causes any loss in volume or tone, others swear it does. You may find that after the trouble of buying a new tailpiece and installing it that your bass sounds the same! Just a word to the wise...

Saddles can get pretty grooved...as long as the string isn't sitting so low in the groove as to cause intonation problems or a lot of fret buzz somewhere along the string, it should be fine. But intonation is a whole other topic and others may have more to say about the saddle.

Regarding the Grover tuners: the box is attached to the plate with little metal pins that can loosen over time, leading to the dreaded "exploding" Grover. Paul W. on the forums can fix loose Grovers by restaking them. But if all the tuners are good you'd really only need two wavys (or two flats) to have a complete set on the bass. And you'd have two left over, to keep or sell down the road. These haven't been manufactured since the mid-70s.

Definitely get some photos of the inside. These will of course help in identifying if the bass was refinished (do you know for sure if it was?)...and the more photos the better for all us freaks!

[Kopfjaeger]

Here are some inside shots

The rear of the toaster Pup

A closer look at the truss rod ends.

I can't tell what is up with the pots. Does everything look OK??

Sepp

[Kopfjaeger]

OK, interesting things under the pickguard. I think I can put to rest the question of if it was a refinish or not. I thought I had noticed a candy apple the sheen in the pick up and bridge cavities but I could not be sure. Once I swept the gook out of the bridge pick up cavity I saw the faint letters BURG written in the well. I suppose the finish was once Burgandy, was it offered in 1973??

The tail piece is bent, not the body! Good news. It actually has quite a curve going on but I still find it amazing that it lifted at all since it seems to be after the two longer screws in the well located to the rear of the saddles. I think I'll save this one and buy a new bridge assembly.

The Bridge pick up really has me stumped. What the hell is it??? The paint has come off the thin plastic or fiberglass plate. I thought this was supposed to be aluminum??? Opinions/guesses??

Sepp

[jps]

DON'T adjust the screws in the bridge pickup!!! The windings are wrapped directly on them. Do you get a good sound from it?

PM sent.

You can straighten the tailpiece, just slowly bend it back into place over time with a wood jig to mount the tailpiece on and a clamp to apply pressure that you increase over time.

[jps]

Here is a photo of the wiring in my former July '73 4001:

[badeggs]

Burgundy was an available finish at the time, I guess someone scraped it and went with Autumnglo...

The wiring looks okay, a mix of cloth wires and those gray plastic-covered ones. The caps vary - sometimes they're Sprague OrangeDrops, I never saw these brown ones before but they mixed 'em up. The pots have the right codes on them, and I'm pretty sure the last number has a "73" in it which dates them correctly. And the holes for the pots and switch are backed with masking tape, which fits.

That's a correct late 72-early 73 bridge hi-gain - the bobbin is plastic (or maybe a sort of fiberboard, I can't recall 100%), and the black paint is chipping off. It sits on a large magnet, which is attached in turn to an aluminum plate.

As Jeff and I both said DON'T turn those pickup poles!

I know very little about (and never mess with) truss rods, especially on Ricks. But do the truss rod ends, and specifically the nuts, look odd to anyone else? A little beat up, maybe? I'm not sure...

[Kopfjaeger]

With the Pup cover on, it looked as though the screws were turned out on a few of the positions. Once off, it does not appear that way although some don't seem as snug as others. Don't worry, I'm not turning any of them! Everything went back together exactly as it was. it plays and sounds great!!

I cleaned everything up polished the body and reassembled. I took off the Fender .094 Flatwounds that were on it and put on a set of factoty Ric strings that I recently pulled off my new 4003. That made and instant difference. I'm not a flat wound string guy.

Next up is the fix the tail piece and bridge. I'm going to attempt to straighten it and I've read a few threads here about how to do it. The bridge needs a set screw and the E string saddle is grooved pretty deep with spiral cuts in it. I had a hell of a time setting the intonation on it and I actually had to pull the bridge out to turn the screws especially the E string.

The nut appears to be pretty grooved as well. From past posts it seems a toss up to whether black or white is correct. If it needs to be replaced what is the most correct? The correct volume and tone knobs, are they like the new style??

I'll keep my eyes out for a pair of wavy Grovers to swap out the straight ones

Right now the neck is as straight as a arrow so I don't need to mess with it. The ends have a ton of paint on them that hides the threads.

She plays and looks great! The sound is awesome!! My wife and kids came home while I was playing her after I had put her back together and they knew the sound was different than my 4003.

If anything, the neck on this 4001 is deeper than my 4003. I won't use the word thicker, since I have not taken measurements yet, it just seems the radius is deeper on the back side than my 4003. Different feel for sure.

Jeff, PM returned.

Sepp

[badeggs]

The 4001/4003 tailpiece/bridge is a beautiful design, but sadly not very functional. It's nearly impossible to set certain things with the strings on...it's been a complaint of Rick players for a long time, probably since people started playing them! I seem to recall reading that the new saddles don't fit these older bridges, but don't quote me on that! I think I read it in a post by cassius987 here on the forums, he might know...

The nut could have been white Delrin or Bakelite like this one. 1973 was very much a transitional year (most years are for these guys, but that year they were changing a lot of features around), and you see both types used side by side. This one looks like the right thickness - a replacement, at least a recent one, is thinner and would create a gap between the nut and the truss rod cover. That line on the nut looks like it was caused by the TRC (am I seeing that right?), so it must back right up against it...probably original.

Yeah get those flats off of there (I can't stand them either)! Glad it's working for you, enjoy it!

[Kopfjaeger]

Yes, the nut sits right up against the TRC. It looks pretty whooped so I guess a replacement will have to be made instead of buying new at PoTR. Damn, I thought that would be easy but I imagine a Luthier will have to fit it properly any way. I'll send you a PM to see if you can recommend any Rick Luthier's in the NJ/NY area. The one near me has no problem working on my early 80's Fender P. but he's not a fan of Rick's, so I refuse to take any to him. One bad experience with an old Rickenbacker has taught me to be very selective.

The bridge is a bit of a pain but once I have it set for the Circle K's I have picked out for it and I have the tail piece and nut issue figured out I may never have to screw with it.

Once again, thanks a million!!

Sepp