Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Jeffs work looks so good it makes me want to convert one of my 4001 basses to a 5 string.

I don't think a 4001 neck is strong enough ... but a 4003 would work structurally ... a 4001 neck is already stressed beyond its design with a set of round wound strings ... but any ric bass made after 1985 or so should do fine ... the difficult thing is what to do about the bridge ... then you have to modify the bridge pickup ... for the neck pickup you can use a toaster of guitar 6 pole high gain ... then you need a new nut and then you have to drill a hole in the headstock and swap out all of the tuners ...

Someday I will try this ... maybe I'll get a beat up 4003 to experiment on ...

Wouldn't the spacing be even tighter on a 4003?

Jeff, I think if you could figure out a way to put the third key on the left of the headstock instead of the right you could have a thriving business, and wouldn't the 4003 spacing be even tighter than a a 4003S/5?

The neck on the 4003S/5 is .125" wider than the 4001/4003.

Bob ... it would be 1/8" tighter at the nut ... but it would be equal or larger at the bridge ... the 4003s5 reuses a lot of 4003 parts ... Ric did not re-invent the wheel for this model ...

The 4003s5 tailpiece has the same dimensions as the 4003 4 string tailpiece ... the main difference is the bridge insert ... this bridge fit in the same size hole as the 4 string bridge ...

So one approach would be to modify a 4003 tailpiece to be similar to a 4003s5 tailpiece ... then you have to find a good machinist to make a 4003s5 bridge insert .... this would end up with the 2 1/16" spacing that the 4003s5 has ...

another approach is to remove the bridge and tailpiece ... replace it with a 5 string bridge with a spacing of 2 1/4" ... the problem here is will it look ugly this way??? I am still trying to come up with an option here that looks good ... I have a few ideas ... I may get an old beat up 4003 and test it out on that ...

A business ... hmmm ... I'm not sure if I want to become a luthier ... well at least a professional one ... I do it more as a hobby for myself and for friends ... You see I don't mind a few screw holes in the back of my headstock ... If I do it professionally then I have to fix that ...

... it would be 1/8" tighter at the nut ... but it would be equal or larger at the bridge ...

But then the B & G strings would taper closer to the edge of the fretboard as they near the body.

Yep ... the trick is to not get them too close ...

If you widen the spacing at the bridge 3/16" then you have widened the spacing at the 12th fret 3/32" that means each outside string is 3/64" of and inch closer to the edge of the fretboard at the 12th fret ... that is not a problem ...

before



after

No problems with the G sliding off the fretboard? I had a 4003 that did that, it was a 93 White/black trim and the neck had been tapered twice, was a bad factory job, you could see a little jog in the wood at around the third fret (I think if I remember correctly)where they had stopped the cut, I liked the narrow neck though but do not like G strings sliding off of a neck.

The two conversions that I did seem to be fine ... they don't slide off anty more than a 4003s5 does or most 4 string basses ...