Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

bassduke49 wrote:

HofnerVox wrote:Beautiful bass! And that's one hell of a nice collection you have there.

Yes, and Graham has no aversion to sharing photos of what he has. He helped fill in a few blanks in the book, too!

And what a great book it is....I'm always flipping through it.

Thank you, sir.

Colonel Sanders wrote:

scotty wrote: And this is exactly why they don't make them anymore.A new one would be expensive.

It is not much more costly to manufacture than a 360 which retails for about $2500. It is not the longer neck that will add this much of an extra manufacturing cost.

The real reason is the low expected demand. When your plant is capacity limited, the financialy astute thing to do is focus on your product that gives you the highest margin. The 4003 margin wise must be way up there compared to a 4005.

Econ geek (me) comment: the fewer units produced, the higher the cost of each unit produced.

There are certain fixed costs to producing a 4005, such as the time spent measuring and inputting all of the measurements into the computer for the CNC machine; the more units produced, the more this cost can be spread, decreasing the cost of each bass. Is anyone still awake?

Yep a 4005 is going to be Pricey and id bet that most people wouldn't put their money where their mouths are. You can breathe easy Graham

paologregorio wrote:If it's going to be a thinline bass, I vote for the 4381 JV, or 4360 PA:

4381: Joey Vasco Signature Model; a four-string bass with a 381 guitar body style and headstock.

4360 WB: Paul Abba Zabba Signature model; a four string bass with a 360 WB guitar body style and bound headstock, overwound bridge pickup, and optional Accent BVB bass vibrato bar.

The 4005, the one Rickebacker bass guitar model which I've never had a burning desire to own. Yes please, a 4381 would be WAY better looking. A 4330JV (330 bass guitar version) wouldn't be bad either. If RIC was going to resurrect a model, I'd prefer it to be the 4002.

rickenbrother wrote:

paologregorio wrote:If it's going to be a thinline bass, I vote for the 4381 JV, or 4360 PA:

4381: Joey Vasco Signature Model; a four-string bass with a 381 guitar body style and headstock.

4360 WB: Paul Abba Zabba Signature model; a four string bass with a 360 WB guitar body style and bound headstock, overwound bridge pickup, and optional Accent BVB bass vibrato bar.

The 4005, the one Rickebacker bass guitar model which I've never had a burning desire to own. Yes please, a 4381 would be WAY better looking. A 4330JV (330 bass guitar version) wouldn't be bad either. If RIC was going to resurrect a model, I'd prefer it to be the 4002.

Oh yeah, definitely the 4002, even if they just used HB-1's in it...

Resurrecting the 4005 would require reverse engineering to program the CNC machines.
Not cost efficient for a very limited appeal bass.
At this point in time, a new 4005 would likely retail for $6000 (or there abouts), based on JH's comment back in the '90s that they would
be in the neighborhood of $4500 in done.
So, if you can get a late period one for slightly less (and they sit for a while) it makes no sense to
reproduce.
Of course, I'm sure if 100 units were ordered, the idea might be given some consideration.....
Then again, maybe not......

The 4005 is outdated. it's a long-scale hollowbody, and hollowbodies work best as short-scales. It has that bulbous look, not very elegant, with a giant top horn to minimize neck dive.

But hollowbody basses are making a comeback, and RIC can design a short-scale based on a 330 body. A quality version of the Shaftesbury Ric-inspired bass. If they can do this and keep the price at not much over $2K, they might have a winner. Or not...

chefothefuture wrote:Resurrecting the 4005 would require reverse engineering to program the CNC machines.
Not cost efficient for a very limited appeal bass.
At this point in time, a new 4005 would likely retail for $6000 (or there abouts), based on JH's comment back in the '90s that they would
be in the neighborhood of $4500 in done.
So, if you can get a late period one for slightly less (and they sit for a while) it makes no sense to
reproduce.
Of course, I'm sure if 100 units were ordered, the idea might be given some consideration.....
Then again, maybe not......

I understand the cost to resurrect the 4005 but today they make 3D scanners that would make easy work to getting the specs to program a CNC. The neck could be a 4001C64 but with non-reverse headstock and change the heel to the 330/360 style to fit the new 4005 body...so the neck is done...your time would go into the body at that point...new bridge and tailpiece also...electronics are already done.

I just think of how many models there are of the guitars, vintage reissues and current models but for the bass we have basically the 4001 shape redone over and over to look like something else...as a bassist I'd love to have a hollow ric.

Everyone says nobody wants them.....but they do they just don't want to pay 6k + for one and how does a bass that no one wants fetch that kind of money?...and I'm talking about resurrecting the 60's version not the the late seventies one with the baby inlays those are the ones people would rather not buy....they want the 60's with the toasters and large inlays.

HofnerVox wrote:I understand the cost to resurrect the 4005 but today they make 3D scanners that would make easy work to getting the specs to program a CNC. The neck could be a 4001C64 but with non-reverse headstock and change the heel to the 330/360 style to fit the new 4005 body...so the neck is done...your time would go into the body at that point...new bridge and tailpiece also...electronics are already done.

I just think of how many models there are of the guitars, vintage reissues and current models but for the bass we have basically the 4001 shape redone over and over to look like something else...as a bassist I'd love to have a hollow ric.

Everyone says nobody wants them.....but they do they just don't want to pay 6k + for one and how does a bass that no one wants fetch that kind of money?...and I'm talking about resurrecting the 60's version not the the late seventies one with the baby inlays those are the ones people would rather not buy....they want the 60's with the toasters and large inlays.

Why not just buy an old one, there are enough of them around? Sounds like money is no object to you so the entry fee is no obstacle for you.

ilan wrote:The 4005 is outdated. it's a long-scale hollowbody, and hollowbodies work best as short-scales. It has that bulbous look, not very elegant, with a giant top horn to minimize neck dive.

But hollowbody basses are making a comeback, and RIC can design a short-scale based on a 330 body. A quality version of the Shaftesbury Ric-inspired bass. If they can do this and keep the price at not much over $2K, they might have a winner. Or not...

Not that i wouldn't mind seeing a bass like the one you suggest,i take exception to your first statement. I have had several full scale hollowbody basses,(or,in the case of the Rimini,a Rick-like 33 1/3" scale) and they work a lot better for me than short scale ones.

I should have added IMHO. That is just my personal experience. There are some very good long-scale hollowbodies, the Epi Jack Casady is just one example. But personally they feel less comfortable to me compared to a short-scale hollowbody.

jps wrote:

HofnerVox wrote:I understand the cost to resurrect the 4005 but today they make 3D scanners that would make easy work to getting the specs to program a CNC. The neck could be a 4001C64 but with non-reverse headstock and change the heel to the 330/360 style to fit the new 4005 body...so the neck is done...your time would go into the body at that point...new bridge and tailpiece also...electronics are already done.

I just think of how many models there are of the guitars, vintage reissues and current models but for the bass we have basically the 4001 shape redone over and over to look like something else...as a bassist I'd love to have a hollow ric.

Everyone says nobody wants them.....but they do they just don't want to pay 6k + for one and how does a bass that no one wants fetch that kind of money?...and I'm talking about resurrecting the 60's version not the the late seventies one with the baby inlays those are the ones people would rather not buy....they want the 60's with the toasters and large inlays.

Why not just buy an old one, there are enough of them around? Sounds like money is no object to you so the entry fee is no obstacle for you.

If money was no object for me I would have a real one but it is so I don't...I'm just saying a reissue of this model I could afford but as of now I just have to look at pictures of them...I run a CNC so that's why I said what I said and not that money is no object.

HofnerVox wrote:

jps wrote:

HofnerVox wrote:I understand the cost to resurrect the 4005 but today they make 3D scanners that would make easy work to getting the specs to program a CNC. The neck could be a 4001C64 but with non-reverse headstock and change the heel to the 330/360 style to fit the new 4005 body...so the neck is done...your time would go into the body at that point...new bridge and tailpiece also...electronics are already done.

I just think of how many models there are of the guitars, vintage reissues and current models but for the bass we have basically the 4001 shape redone over and over to look like something else...as a bassist I'd love to have a hollow ric.

Everyone says nobody wants them.....but they do they just don't want to pay 6k + for one and how does a bass that no one wants fetch that kind of money?...and I'm talking about resurrecting the 60's version not the the late seventies one with the baby inlays those are the ones people would rather not buy....they want the 60's with the toasters and large inlays.

Why not just buy an old one, there are enough of them around? Sounds like money is no object to you so the entry fee is no obstacle for you.

If money was no object for me I would have a real one but it is so I don't...I'm just saying a reissue of this model I could afford but as of now I just have to look at pictures of them...I run a CNC so that's why I said what I said and not that money is no object.

As I said, a re-issue would likely be in the $6000 range. Is that affordable? It certainly is less than the $9000+ that 60's ones fetch, but it is likely out of the price
range of many. Are there 100 or more people willing to step up to the plate with that kind of dough to order one? I think not.

I too prefer the short scale hollow body to the long scale....
Given that I now have @ 70 sets of SS Maximas I need the basses to put them on!