Is my 4001 Truss Rod Original?

[johnhall]

QB677 left the factory on 21 Feb 1977 as a Model 4001 JetGlo.

If this is it, it's been highly modified, obviously.

[jps]

Paul, have you learned anything new about what's up with this bass?

[Paulp202]

Nothing yet. I do have some pictures of the repair that was done. Maybe that will give some clue as to what's going on with the neck? I was in contact with the 2 people who owned it before me. One of them must have been the guy who bought it off of the good will site, so there's no telling where it was before that.

[headbanger]

I don't want to tread on any toes here or offend but my take is it a fake.

Perhaps the original bass was damaged or broken somehow & the parts were transferred onto a substitute body.

YMMV

[daveman]

I don't want to tread on any toes here or offend but my take is it a fake.

Perhaps the original bass was damaged or broken somehow & the parts were transferred onto a substitute body.

YMMV

Agreed.

[Ontario_RIC_fan]

Paul:

Can you take the pick guard off and share a few pics of the cavity... Original RICS typically have an unpainted bit with writing that workers in the factory put on the body as it goes through the various parts of the construction and finishing process... A fake would not have those markings there or could be painted all over in the cavity... Just a thought....

[FretlessOnly]

I've own or have owned '72, '73, and '80 4001s and I've looked at many, many hundreds of photos in the register. I'd say pretty strongly that this looks genuine to me. One thing that stands out is that "Army fatigue" greenglo that certain jetglos take on. I don't know, but I don't think a fake would necessarily capture that oddity in aging. I would say that the fingerboard wood looks atypical; do the side dots not line up with the fingerboard dots (in other words, the side dots are at pitch and the fingerboard dots are where they would be on a fretted bass?

I've seen photos of one other bound headstock 4001 (or was it this bass several years back???) - obviously a mod, but a fairly easy (albeit time-consuming) one.

Put it this way - to me, it shows none of the obvious signs we typically see in a fake.

[geofio]

It just don't look right to me.

[Paulp202]

I've uploaded the pictures that I have of the scarf joint repair. Now that I'm looking at it after having some questions answered here, it seems like the headstock replacement certainly happened. The channels for the dual truss rods stop right at the headstock. The headstock is also smaller than my 2010 4003's headstock. I dunno if this is typical of 70s Rics, but that might help solve this mystery. There's also a good picture of the control cavity. As far as the side dots, they are at the actual fret positions, and there's one for every "fret."

[weemac]

It's genuine no doubt! And that is a really funky repair...

Eden.

[jps]

The headstock is also smaller than my 2010 4003's headstock. I dunno if this is typical of 70s Rics...

The headstock shape has changed over the years, throughout the whole history of Rickenbacker basses, an interesting subject all by itself.

I am glad to see these photos as they tell the whole story, well, most of it, anyway; we still don't know why the headstock had to be replaced in the first place, but that is not important to this discussion. Thanks for this.

[Ontario_RIC_fan]

Paul I have the exact same unpainted square on my 4001 in the cavity...

[Colonel Sanders]

100% genuine.

With a cool story to tell on top of that!

[headbanger]

yep. splains everything

[daveman]

Wow. What a story. Also explains why the volute looks off.