Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Ruby is a red over silver, ala candy apple red. it is possible that someone could not play fretless and had the lines added later. See if someone can get a picture of the sidemarkers to see if they are correct. the bass looks more burgundyglo...you can't see the skunk stripe under ruby...

That is not burgandy, later burgandy is the same color as the original just a little bit lighter, people ask me if mine is red, no one would have to ask if that one is red, you cannot see through burgandy at all, the dots are there, it is entirely stock except for the lines. (and maybe the paint, but I think that's stock also). I also think someone added the lines.

There's an 84 Ruby 4003 at Mike Park's site that looks exactly like that, is see through. I have heard of and seen early Ruby's before. If that's not Ruby it's do until one comes along.

It is not clear if this finish is original but I have seen burgandy range from a dark purple to a light red-purple wash. I have always though of burgandy to be like FG and the other transparent colors. Variations are likely and can be somewhat extreme.

I have a Burgundy 1979 and a Ruby 1987. This fretless is definitely not Ruby. Jaymi is right...Ruby is red over silver; candy-apple red, not translucent. If Mike has a Ruby on his websight that looks like this, it is mis-labeled. I agree with Ted also, there were variations in the Burgundy finish, especially in the early years. Some are more cherry-looking. Other factors to consider are the aging of the clearcoat and the lighting in the photo. Under a very bright light, my '79 Burg would look pretty close to this one.

Looking at the photos of this one again,(especially the jack-plate photo) I'd have to say that: A) the photos are very bright, and B) the clearcoat is in excellent condition and shows very little yellowing. But it could also be a very good re-fin.

Uh - Burgundy is see-through, Bob - or a 'Trans' finish.

My '72 which is on eBay right now shows that.

mine must be light black then.

Personally, I think it's Fireglo stain, without the tapering off to Maple normally seen.

A red 87 is most likely red not Ruby, red is a solid color Ruby is a very bright metallic color like on Mike Park's sight. Maybe this one is a refinsish but it certainly is not a burgandy like any I have have ever seen before. There was a lot of discussion about these colors a few years ago in the archives and I'm pretty sure that JH chimed in somewhere and there were two shades of burgandy made and one was just a little lighter than the old plum colored burgandy, had a little more red or a little less black in it. This 4001FL bass has no black in it at all that I can see. My burgnady is slighly translucent but is so opaque you have to stare at it from 2 ft. to see the grain, it is not obvious at all, in fact I never realized it was translucent until just now when I stared at it in the light.

I don't think it is likely that Mike Parks would mislabel a Ric color either.

If you go to collectables on Mike Parks site there are many Reds, Burgandys, and one Ruby 4003 among many other colors.

this is from Mikes site

this is from the ad in ebay

I do stand corrected though, he has a couple of guitars he calls Ruby that look Burgandy to me.