Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

RIC_FACTORY wrote:
...Nobody has nailed it thus far by the way.

(4006 does sound cool though... Perhaps a 381 bass?)

Rats. I was hopeful about a 4000V57 re-issue. I guess we'll just need to sit tight and see what gets announced.

Sounds like a whole new model.

cassius987 wrote:I'd be cool with an all carbon-fiber Ric. I like the all carbon-fiber cellos and uprights I've heard.

Interesting. I certainly wouldn't dismiss that out of hand. There are a lot of materials to experiment with.

I notice that some folks want an instrument that looks to the future & "pushes the envelope," while most want something that revisits the past. It will be instructive to see which way RIC goes. It will say a lot about who they perceive as their target market.

(My prediction is more towards the "aging Beatles fans" end of the spectrum...but what do I know...)

Guys, please excuse my ignorance, but why would production costs be so high on a 4005 RI? I would love to have one of those, but there is no way I could afford an vintage one on a teacher's salary.

since all the other guesses are ruled out,how about "rickenbacker announces our newest employee,jason lollar",heh heh..... or perhaps our good friend sergio.....

For the 4005, tooling would be in the hundreds of thousands, and only a small percentage of the Ric-buying public would really be interested in it (at the cost it would have to be.) Remember, as a forum we've discussed it a lot and many here would love one, but how many outside of the forum would jump at a 4005? Probably not many. Factor in cost, and probably 50-75% of those who say they'd buy one, even forum members, would bow out. Economics would dictate in this instance, I would think. Interest would die down awfully fast and they might never recoup all the costs for developing/production.

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but I'm wondering if this model might include active electronics...

If it's been mentioned, then I guess I'll reinforce that view.

apollo11 wrote:For the 4005, tooling would be in the hundreds of thousands

I'm not so sure about that. Most of the parts are already there, with the possible exception of what it takes to make the bass "R" tailpiece (that could be expensive). The wooden parts would require some CNC coding work but certainly not >100K worth.

I am pretty sure the bass R tailpiece is the same as the guitar tailpiece except for the string slots which could be cut by hand.

I predict that the 4001 will return to the regular lineup.

Here's why. The trend at RIC HQ is toward streamlining, with an eye on minimizing the backlog. All the time and care that goes into making really spot-on vintage reissues is essentially wasted if not enough people buy the model. Clearly, though, they understand the value and appeal of those vintage designs - in the last few years, many of the 'classic' features have begun to reappear on the 4003. FWI, walnut wings, shaping, etc. So rather than go to the trouble of making a true 'vintage reissue' why not make the same basic bass bodies and alter them slightly? Hi-Gains, push-pull, and 1" spacing on the 4003. Toaster and Horseshoe, push-pull, and 1/2" spacing on the 4001. I presume they've already got the toasters, horseshoes and pickguards, so all they'd need for the 'new model' is to take a modern 4003 body and route the neck pickup hole at 1/2". No muss no fuss. The resulting bass would save RIC time (and thus money), so it would be a little cheaper than a true vintage reissue, and I bet it would satisfy a lot of people. The best of vintage and modern. I know I'd buy one!

beefandbones wrote:I predict that the 4001 will return to the regular lineup.

Here's why. The trend at RIC HQ is toward streamlining, with an eye on minimizing the backlog. All the time and care that goes into making really spot-on vintage reissues is essentially wasted if not enough people buy the model. Clearly, though, they understand the value and appeal of those vintage designs - in the last few years, many of the 'classic' features have begun to reappear on the 4003. FWI, walnut wings, shaping, etc. So rather than go to the trouble of making a true 'vintage reissue' why not make the same basic bass bodies and alter them slightly? Hi-Gains, push-pull, and 1" spacing on the 4003. Toaster and Horseshoe, push-pull, and 1/2" spacing on the 4001. I presume they've already got the toasters, horseshoes and pickguards, so all they'd need for the 'new model' is to take a modern 4003 body and route the neck pickup hole at 1/2". No muss no fuss. The resulting bass would save RIC time (and thus money), so it would be a little cheaper than a true vintage reissue, and I bet it would satisfy a lot of people. The best of vintage and modern. I know I'd buy one!

An interesting and logical idea. I would agree that whatever the new product is, it will not be something that will further backlog production.

markbass99 wrote:

weemac wrote:4001v73?

Eden.

V73 aint gonna happen- no wavy grovers in production anymore!!!

Yes of course...

Eden.

beefandbones wrote:I predict that the 4001 will return to the regular lineup.

Here's why. The trend at RIC HQ is toward streamlining, with an eye on minimizing the backlog. All the time and care that goes into making really spot-on vintage reissues is essentially wasted if not enough people buy the model. Clearly, though, they understand the value and appeal of those vintage designs - in the last few years, many of the 'classic' features have begun to reappear on the 4003. FWI, walnut wings, shaping, etc. So rather than go to the trouble of making a true 'vintage reissue' why not make the same basic bass bodies and alter them slightly? Hi-Gains, push-pull, and 1" spacing on the 4003. Toaster and Horseshoe, push-pull, and 1/2" spacing on the 4001. I presume they've already got the toasters, horseshoes and pickguards, so all they'd need for the 'new model' is to take a modern 4003 body and route the neck pickup hole at 1/2". No muss no fuss. The resulting bass would save RIC time (and thus money), so it would be a little cheaper than a true vintage reissue, and I bet it would satisfy a lot of people. The best of vintage and modern. I know I'd buy one!

Makes perfect sense.

beefandbones wrote:I predict that the 4001 will return to the regular lineup.

Here's why. The trend at RIC HQ is toward streamlining, with an eye on minimizing the backlog. All the time and care that goes into making really spot-on vintage reissues is essentially wasted if not enough people buy the model. Clearly, though, they understand the value and appeal of those vintage designs - in the last few years, many of the 'classic' features have begun to reappear on the 4003. FWI, walnut wings, shaping, etc. So rather than go to the trouble of making a true 'vintage reissue' why not make the same basic bass bodies and alter them slightly? Hi-Gains, push-pull, and 1" spacing on the 4003. Toaster and Horseshoe, push-pull, and 1/2" spacing on the 4001. I presume they've already got the toasters, horseshoes and pickguards, so all they'd need for the 'new model' is to take a modern 4003 body and route the neck pickup hole at 1/2". No muss no fuss. The resulting bass would save RIC time (and thus money), so it would be a little cheaper than a true vintage reissue, and I bet it would satisfy a lot of people. The best of vintage and modern. I know I'd buy one!

Good insights. For the 4001, what about dot neck and skunk stripe (shedua or walnut)?

libratune wrote:Good insights. For the 4001, what about dot neck and skunk stripe (shedua or walnut)?

To be vintage correct, with the exception of the 4002, you can have either the shedua strip or walnut headstock wings, not both. I prefer the wings.

Yes, walnut wings are preferable and I think the skunk stripe is a thing of the past (with new neck construction), but just thought I'd ask.