Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

This one really shows you the thickness of the neck compared to my FJ on the left.

paologregorio wrote:Ricks just keep getting better:
Full width Inlays
UV, non-yellowing finishes
Slim, two piece bass necks

The longer I wait to buy a 4003 to replace my long gone JG 4001, the happier I'll probably be with the bass, not that I'm not already pretty happy with Rick basses!

That's the ticket, just keep waiting... Eventually you'll get one that plays itself and has a selector to make you sound like your favorite artist...


I had an early 2009 and I have to say, the neck was what I'd call a baseball bat. I really couldn't stand it so I got rid of it. I haven't tried one of the later 2009's with the 2 piece neck so I can't comment on them. My 2010 4003 is fantastic however, I'd say it's just about as nice as my '76 4001. Of course, it's a 3 piece neck...

cassius987 wrote:My 2009 is a "baseball bat" so that's not really what I'm shooting for anyways. Care to elaborate?

I wouldn't describe the 2010 4003 I played as a "bat" because it wasn't a fat round profile; it felt sort of flat (squashed D), but kind of wide. I can only compare it with what I use - a 2009 C64 with a 2-piece neck (nearly as wide but not so deep) and a 1978 4000 (slimmer side to side and front to back, all the way down the neck). The one I tried out was not difficult to play at all, but just not what I would call thin.

I just don’t know that we can confidently say that a particular year, or a one, or two piece neck will be thin, fat or otherwise; maybe because the hand finishing will create an individual difference, maybe because we all judge it differently. The actual measurable differences are often miniscule, but we all feel it differently and I guess, if you can, you've got to try them first.

I've got to be honest and say that if they were "giving it away" (it was £1899) I would have convinced myself that the neck was like a skipping rope and gladly took it home with me.

I also have to say that the horns were very slim and elegant, the finishing was superb (Mapleglo) and the bass shone out in the shop as a thing of astonishing beauty. We don’t see so many in the UK and they are exciting things to witness…oh and yes it sounded pretty good too.

godber wrote:

cassius987 wrote:My 2009 is a "baseball bat" so that's not really what I'm shooting for anyways. Care to elaborate?

I wouldn't describe the 2010 4003 I played as a "bat" because it wasn't a fat round profile; it felt sort of flat (squashed D), but kind of wide. I can only compare it with what I use - a 2009 C64 with a 2-piece neck (nearly as wide but not so deep) and a 1978 4000 (slimmer side to side and front to back, all the way down the neck). The one I tried out was not difficult to play at all, but just not what I would call thin.

Gotcha. I think width of a 4003 neck is fairly consistent... 1 & 11/16'' seems to be the rule, basically a slightly slimmer P Bass sort of width but with less taper.