Cock-eyed tuner on a 4003 MapleGlo - is this suspicious?

espidog · Post by **espidog** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:55 am

A friend of mine is just considering buying his first ever Rickenbacker - a 2011 4003 MapleGlo. The seller lives a long way from him, though, so he can't inspect the instrument in person. He has sent me some pictures taken by the seller, for me to check out, and immediately one thing strikes me as odd.

Look at the tuners on this headstock:

Why is that G string tuner ****-eyed? Were any 4003s made like this, or does it look fishy to you? All advice gratefully appreciated.

Colonel Sanders · Post by **Colonel Sanders** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:08 am

It is totally normal on the new models.

espidog · Post by **espidog** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:50 am

That's a relief. Thank you, Colonel.

Colonel Sanders · Post by **Colonel Sanders** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:20 am

2011 4003 necks are brilliant in my humble opinion.

Your friend should love it. The newer 4003 are very versatile instruments.

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:10 pm

Colonel Sanders wrote:... The newer 4003 are very versatile instruments.

... as the older 4001 was!

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:58 pm

heinpete wrote:
Colonel Sanders wrote:... The newer 4003 are very versatile instruments.
... as the older 4001 was!

... and the 4005, too!

Scotty_Guitar · Post by **Scotty_Guitar** » Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:25 pm

Just sold my 2011 4003FG, and 3 of 4 tuning pegs were ****-eyed like that. I straightened the worst one (also the G).

Some set-up guys install using the curve of the headstock as reference, and some use the neck's centerline as reference (the latter being the "correct" way in my opinion). It seems this practice has been going on for decades!

JB4003 · Post by **JB4003** » Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:56 pm

I am the new owner and am absolutely delighted with the purchase!

Many thanks to Ken for evaluation/appraisal and finally courier services.

Cheers, John

geofio · Post by **geofio** » Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:21 pm

same on my new 4003

espidog · Post by **espidog** » Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:09 pm

JB4003 wrote:I am the new owner and am absolutely delighted with the purchase!

Many thanks to Ken for evaluation/appraisal and finally courier services.

Cheers, John

Now that you've fessed up to being the new owner, John, you'll have to put up with me posting this pic of you enjoying your new baby on the very night I handed it over:

8mileshigher · Post by **8mileshigher** » Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Congrats John B. on your new acquisition !! Looks very nice !

JB4003 · Post by **JB4003** » Fri May 02, 2014 6:32 am

8mileshigher wrote:Congrats John B. on your new acquisition !! Looks very nice !

... over a year later and several shows under its belt I still sport the same dumb Cheshire Cat grin whenever I play it!

Amazingly versatile, I would also say surprisingly so too. I expected it to be more of a Rock only bass, but it does funk, swing, blues and everything in between. Am not a great slapper (arf arf) but it handles that well too.

Thanks Ken for sharing that photo, hope all well with you, long time no speak...

ricosound · Post by **ricosound** » Fri May 02, 2014 11:07 am

espidog wrote:A friend of mine is just considering buying his first ever Rickenbacker - a 2011 4003 MapleGlo. The seller lives a long way from him, though, so he can't inspect the instrument in person. He has sent me some pictures taken by the seller, for me to check out, and immediately one thing strikes me as odd.

Look at the tuners on this headstock:

Why is that G string tuner ****-eyed? Were any 4003s made like this, or does it look fishy to you? All advice gratefully appreciated.

My 2012 4003FG is just like this. It was the first thing I noticed right out of the case like it was built wrong. I hate it that it doesn't line up with the others but at the same time it adds character and I guess it's only cosmetic and on the backside. My feedback to RIC is that while it might make sense in some ergonomic respect most people's impression is that it doesn't "look" right.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri May 02, 2014 11:15 am

Lining them up straight causes there to be very little clearance between the "ears" of the button and the headstock, such that depending how you reach to the key, your fingers get mashed. Lining up the centerline of the key perpendicular to the tangent of the edge solves this problem and . . . in my opinion, most people would agree . . . looks more natural from the front of the instrument.

ricosound · Post by **ricosound** » Fri May 02, 2014 4:10 pm

johnhall wrote:Lining them up straight causes there to be very little clearance between the "ears" of the button and the headstock, such that depending how you reach to the key, your fingers get mashed. Lining up the centerline of the key perpendicular to the tangent of the edge solves this problem and . . . in my opinion, most people would agree . . . looks more natural from the front of the instrument.

That's why I threw in the word ergonomic. I agree it functions well enough, it's just on first impression it looks strange. On mine only the G tuner is "cocked" and upon inspection, others have pointed it out too. When you look at the picture above of Ken's it does catch your eye.

Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum