Fantasy RICkenball: 4003S

[cassius987]

I have always wondered what it would be like if the main Rickenbacker flagship bass was the 4003S, and the 4003 ("deluxe" version we currently see the most) was a rarer beast. This would cut some costs for RIC, possibly lower prices, and potentially be an answer to the people who say things like "I don't like the binding" or "ROS confuses me", and even an opportunity to get a new bridge going as the frequent excuse for not doing it is people would complain about the break with tradition. If you still offer the 4003 you can still say you support the old tailpiece. Now that the C64 is on the outs there is no direct comparison to be made with the 4003S; previously it probably would have looked weird to offer a cheaper 4003S and a costly 4003S with different pickups and a funny headstock.

Basically I'm thinking something roughly similar to the 330 vs. 360 comparison...

1. 4003S would not have binding on the neck or body, but 4003 would continue to. I don't think Rics have much issues with fret sprout so I'm not worried about this leading to any issues, besides they already offer unbound necks.
2. 4003S would (most likely) use the same wiring harness as a C64, while the 4003 would retain Ric-O-Sound. Another option, but probably too radical a departure, is VVT wiring.
3. 4003S would have dot inlays, and the 4003 would keep its full-width triangles.
4. 4003S would provide an opportunity for RIC to use a modern bridge on a 4000 bass that wasn't the 4004, which is very popular with some but not with others. The 4003 would keep the old bridge. Naturally this little experiment would quickly reveal whether people were ready for a new bridge or not on a "classic"-looking Ric.

In the grand scheme of things this might lower the cost to make a 4003 by a little, probably the biggest savings in the labor required to do the binding and inlays, and that might be reflected in the price. On the other hand there might be an early rush on the 4003S that would drive prices up above the 4003. Eventually an equilibrium would probably happen in production and purchasing and the lower supply of the 4003 might raise its price slightly while the 4003S might land at a price a little (but not a lot) below the current 4003. The 4004 might take a hit in prices as well if the 4003S diverts some of the demand for it (hard to say). It's already, I suspect, a less profitable model (I'm no 4004 hater, by the way, though I do prefer the 4003 for looks).

This is just something I've had in my head for a few years, thought I'd let it out and see how many people come to smash it with baseball bats... Oh well! It would be a nice way to move the 4003S out and drop the current tailpiece system while preserving it in the deluxe model, which I think would be a win-win for most of us. Thanks for listening.

[scotty]

Id buy a 4003S i like that idea very much.

[godber]

You're making sense to me Joshua and I would absolutely love one - especially with the beautiful new slim horn and body shape.

Last time I mentioned it here I got the dead horse picture. Good luck with this thread!

[jps]

Last time I mentioned it here I got the dead horse picture. Good luck with this thread!

One of these?

Dead Horse.jpg

Dead Horse!.gif

Or, a different one?

[MaplegloMatt]

I agree whole heartedly. A 4003S would be a great addition to the current offerings.

Your bridge idea sounds very good...and I've been thinking of another one. Now that the "vintage" models (C64, V63) are over how about having a vintage option? The current 4003 would recieve a modern bridge/tailpiece and you could have a vintage option (available on either the 4003 or 4003S model) with the original bridge/tailpiece, toaster, horseshoe, longer pickguard, plexi trc, etc. I think RIC could really command a good price for the option and many customers would go for it. The addition of an updated bridge on the current standard 4003 would fit in with revised truss rods, adjustable pole pieces, and other tweaks they've made over the years.

[godber]

Last time I mentioned it here I got the dead horse picture. Good luck with this thread!

One of these?

Dead Horse.jpg

Dead Horse!.gif

Or, a different one?

G'damn - you've done me again Mr Scott!

[jps]

Last time I mentioned it here I got the dead horse picture. Good luck with this thread!

One of these?

Dead Horse.jpg

Dead Horse!.gif

Or, a different one?

G'damn - you've done me again Mr Scott!

[MaplegloMatt]

.......and yes, I too believe we are flogging one very dead horse!

[cassius987]

.......and yes, I too believe we are flogging one very dead horse!

Hence my longtime reluctance to post this idea...

[rickyfricky]

Id buy a 4003S i like that idea very much.

I would buy at least TWO, unless I'm cured of GAS before then.

[superdick2112]

I'll play along...

Yes, it would be cool to see a new bass - ANY new bass- in the Ric line-up.
I like the idea of a single-pickup bass using the Schaller bridge off the 4004 series, and the deletion of binding & triangle inlays would theoretically reduce manufacturing costs.
I would also like to see the option of either one Hi-Gain or one HB1, and costs could be reduced even further by offering only solid colors, allowing for multi piece bodies with offset laminations.

Unfortunately there are only three chances of this ever happening - Slim, Fat and None.

[cassius987]

Unfortunately there are only three chances of this ever happening - Slim, Fat and None.

What's the deal with slim and fat chances being equally unlikely? Is this some kind of egalitarian way of acknowledging the worthiness our plus-sized brethren through snark?

[cjj]

I suppose it would be nice for those that like the 4003S. I'd never buy one, I like the binding and inlays. I actually wish my 4004 had the triangle inlays, and maybe even binding, but then I suppose it wouldn't be a 4004...

[rickenbrother]

I suppose it would be nice for those that like the 4003S. I'd never buy one, I like the binding and inlays. I actually wish my 4004 had the triangle inlays

CJ, you're in the majority, the greater number of people prefer the binding and triangle inlays. I also think that a 4004 with full width inlays would be cool, but some of the fingerboards have really nice figuring to them. Large inlays take away from nice looking wood.

[cjj]

I suppose it would be nice for those that like the 4003S. I'd never buy one, I like the binding and inlays. I actually wish my 4004 had the triangle inlays

CJ, you're in the majority, the greater number of people prefer the binding and triangle inlays. I also think that a 4004 with full width inlays would be cool, but some of the fingerboards have really nice figuring to them. Large inlays take away from nice looking wood.

True, and being the grain freak that I am, it makes for quite a quandary...