Page 3 of 3

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:49 am
by heinpete
rickfan60 wrote:...For the same reasons, the 4002 was on the price list for years after the last one was made.
:roll: ...and there is still the misterious pallett of unfinished 4002 bodies in the RIC plant... :roll: :mrgreen:

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:33 am
by cassius987
Here's some interesting theory in practice. Last night I was messing around my tuners for a couple of reasons (measuring and changing the tightness of the bolts to mess with resonance) and I noticed something. All the bolts that drilled into the maple held tight and bit hard. All of the bolts that drilled into the walnut were almost totally stripped out (and I had never touched them before). Interesting, no?

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:29 am
by rickfan60
Maybe someone over-tightened them before you bought it. Walnut is softer than maple but it is normally strong enough to hold screws.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:55 pm
by cassius987
rickfan60 wrote:Maybe someone over-tightened them before you bought it. Walnut is softer than maple but it is normally strong enough to hold screws.
I doubt it was overtightened unless the factory did it. I bought this brand new from PotR.

The screws don't fall out, they just don't really have any tightening power. They spin around in their threads, or what is left of them. Again, that's only on the walnut portion.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:06 pm
by rickfan60
cassius987 wrote:
rickfan60 wrote:Maybe someone over-tightened them before you bought it. Walnut is softer than maple but it is normally strong enough to hold screws.
I doubt it was overtightened unless the factory did it. I bought this brand new from PotR.

The screws don't fall out, they just don't really have any tightening power. They spin around in their threads, or what is left of them. Again, that's only on the walnut portion.

That is odd. I have never seen that before. Maybe the wood shrank from low humidity? You could put a little water on the screws before you put them back in or pack a little sawdust and wood glue in there.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:09 pm
by cassius987
rickfan60 wrote:That is odd. I have never seen that before. Maybe the wood shrank from low humidity? You could put a little water on the screws before you put them back in or pack a little sawdust and wood glue in there.
I had thought about the sawdust/woodglue idea. I may. Would it increase or decrease resonance? Increase, you think?

I am combating a pretty nasty dead spot at the 9th/10th semitones of the D-string which is why I was experimenting with the tuners in the first place.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:58 pm
by rickfan60
It won't affect the resonance. Most of the tone comes from the mass of the neck slab. The tuner screws are so small and displace so little wood, I doubt that even the most highly trained ear could detect a change.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:22 pm
by rickfan60
I have received some good information about ebony that I should pass along to you all. The most sought after ebonies are from Africa and most if not all are endangered. The varieties called Gabon and Massacar are the most common on the market and demand for them is driving them both to extinction. There are indeed Indian species and some from other parts of Asia which are similar in color and density but are not all considered to be true ebonies as I incorrectly stated. Sorry for any confusion my first post may have caused.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:14 pm
by rickfan60
Here is another update. Rickenbacker sourced the shedua from Mexico.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:02 am
by Tarrbot
On the 4001/4003 turnabout, even the 1992 catalog still listed the 4001FL, indicating that there may still have been some of the old truss/neck assemblies in house that late. John may be correct in saying that no "new" 4001 basses were manufactured after 1980/81, but assembling, finishing, selling, and shipping may not be included in the manufactured term.
This I did not know. I recently got back into Rick's and I had an 90 bass. I was always under the impression that it was a 4001 and not knowing better believed it until just recently when I read up more on the history of the 4001 and 4003.

Up until I read this thread, I had been under the impression for the last 6 months that it must have been a 4003 and I was misinformed.

And seeing you state that about the 4001FL only reminded me about that being offered then, which is what I really wanted but the store didn't have any. :(

I wished I had the s/n of that bass then.

Oh, I want to mention, great read here.

Is there something in later installments (which I'm trying to read in order) about care of the wood?

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:57 am
by rickfan60
No, I did not cover wood care but I did discuss finish care in Part 4.

Re: Anatomy Of A Rickenbacker Bass Part 1

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:59 pm
by Darthbass
thanks for doing this-great reading.