New Headstock for the 4003?

thinneckrick · Post by **thinneckrick** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:35 pm

I agree, I think the thin neck profile went back to the 60's style neck all the way around . Including the headstock.

ram · Post by **ram** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:10 pm

I think they'd be silly not to take input here. Free marketing info from users and potential users. Man it just dosen't get any better than that.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:13 pm

I will cast my vote for checkered binding as well ... the 4003 already has a lot of retro features ... the next logical feature is checkered binding ...

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:16 pm

Mmmmmmmmm, Checkered Binding..... [drools like a fiend on Halloween.....]

jsod · Post by **jsod** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:23 pm

OK...here are my pics:

This one was taken last night at a local music store. This 4003 is brand new, just delivered from the factory last week. It has the thinner neck and new adjustable pickup pole pieces, but note it still has the familiar bulbous crest on the headstock (hehe..."bulbous"):

This 4003 was listed in an eBay auction that ended about a month ago. It was made around June of 2006. Note the headstock appears taller and has a more elegant cresting wave, like the old vintage style:

Finally, the photo of this 2006 model came from a link at the official RIC forum. Note again the more elegant crest:

Can JH or someone in the production department give us the word if all 4003 headstocks will eventually be changed to this new, more vintage style?

I certainly hope so...I really miss the vintage headstocks; they need to come back.

wints · Post by **wints** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:30 pm

So, it's all in one's head eh?

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:39 pm

Good pics Alex,

A while back several suggestions were made for new colors for COY or the 75th color. Many of them were actually tested by RIC and later displayed during the factory tours given for the 75th (party) weekend. It was very cool to see those maple slabs done up in some of the suggested colors.

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:22 am

Here's a shot of the 75th headstock

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:51 am

The post from Alex Heist shows that with the slim appearing headstock merely the Walnut wings were thicker. I suspect the overall dimension of the headstock did not change? However if the neck has gone slimmer, than that would be the end of Jeff Rath's 425 mod??? I don't hope so!
Still keep my 1997 4003FG for that!

jsod · Post by **jsod** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:09 am

Peter:
I thought that at first myself because the walnut wings are in fact thicker, but if you look closely, the crests in the bottom two photos do have a noticeably different shape (to me, anyway).

Scott:
That looks like the more bulbous crest on the 75th 4003.

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:19 am

From what I can see of the headstocks in my shot, they have the same look as my '68 but not the wider look of the earlier 60's basses. Jeff's '68 looks identical to mine. I prefer that shape to the early 60's wider headstock shape. Both are nice and a move in the 'as God intended' direction.

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:04 pm

The 75th 4003 does have the bulbous headstock.

jsod · Post by **jsod** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:14 am

No response yet from Rickenbacker to the headstock question?

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:14 am

We already previously said that they may be of either type, depending exactly which of the two machines is in use for a given batch.

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:32 am

Hmm..Sounds like the thinner necks will come with vintage headstocks and the fatter necks may come with the bulbous headstocks. I wonder if the new, thinner necks are the same part unfinished as the C64's? Seems that would simplify production some and lead toward my theory that the 4003 and all 4001 vintage basses will one day converge into one model.