Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:12 am**

Yours appears to have aged into "true" AFG... nice!

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:13 am**

iamthebassman wrote:My '80 4003, gotta be one of the earliest lefty 4003s, I would think.

And a darn nice FG, Ron!

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:51 pm**

Here's my 1996 Fireglo 4003

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:17 pm**

I came to the conclusion that I dont have any normal (non BT) 4003's.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:46 pm**

Here are a couple. First, my 2005 4003JG, no longer mine:

And my current 4003PFB (pretty freakin' black, since it cannot be None More Black

)...

I no longer (for many years now) have my very first, a 1986 4003FG. After seeing all these nice amberings, I sure wish I did still have it.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:02 pm**

rickfan60 wrote:
1965 wrote:
rickfan60 wrote:I left out the C64 and the C64S models which are also based on the 4003
Huh? That makes no sense, they're totally different.
They are variations on the same theme.

Well, they're the same shape (roughly), other than that they have different: headstocks, inlays, pickups, electronics, binding yes/no, pickguards, knobs. They might be made the same with CNC, but what does that have to do with it?

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:27 pm**

cjj wrote:May 1984 Mapleglo... exquisite!
4003_body.jpg

4003_body_back.jpg
Hmm, looks familiar...

CJ, do you realize how close you came to not owning that bass? Twice I have been tempted - Steve almost didn't get it either. She is a beauty. If I hadn't gotten the V63, this bass would have been mine. Enjoy.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:32 pm**

johnallg wrote:
cjj wrote:May 1984 Mapleglo... exquisite!
4003_body.jpg

4003_body_back.jpg
Hmm, looks familiar...
CJ, do you realize how close you came to not owning that bass? Twice I have been tempted - Steve almost didn't get it either. She is a beauty. If I hadn't gotten the V63, this bass would have been mine. Enjoy.

Yeah, I can understand. I missed it by just a tad the first time it showed up, Steve beat me out that time, but I guess I got it en the end, just cost a bit more.

It's not likely to be available anytime soon though!

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:01 pm**

1965 wrote:Well, they're the same shape (roughly), other than that they have different: headstocks, inlays, pickups, electronics, binding yes/no, pickguards, knobs. They might be made the same with CNC, but what does that have to do with it?

I think it has more to do with the truss rods than anything else. The C basses are made using the current 4003 construction methods therefore people tend to think of them as 4003 variants rather than 4001s.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:09 pm**

1965 wrote: Well, they're the same shape (roughly), other than that they have different: headstocks, inlays, pickups, electronics, binding yes/no, pickguards, knobs. They might be made the same with CNC, but what does that have to do with it?

You are talking about mostly cosmetic differences. The underlying bass is the same. The headstock is merely reversed and there is some model-specific hardware like the treble pickup and the nickel plated tuners, and the lefty-look TRC. The C64 body should be pretty much the same shape as a 4003 from the same year. The C64S is slightly different to reflect the overzealous sanding job applied by Macca once upon a time. I don't know if the inlays are different from the vinyl dots used in the 4003S models. Otherwise pretty much every other part will fit neatly into a standard 4003. The electronics include the .0047 cap which was also part of the original 4003.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:33 pm**

My Blueburst 4003 (one of the earliest ones) before I bought it:

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:37 pm**

That's a pretty Blueburst, Ron!

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:38 pm**

Thanks Joey!

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:56 pm**

rickfan60 wrote:You do have a lovely collection Paul. What nice colors too.

There are several major groupings in the 4003 family. The first ones had the old style rods but were adjusted at the body, as Paul said. The necks were made on rectangular blanks that some times have 3 part laminations like the 70's 4001s but instead of shedua center lams they have maple ones. They also share the D shaped neck, the smaller headstock of the 70's 4001 and the 70's 7.25" fingerboard radius. After a while the neck blanks were reduced just two pieces. The electronics were pretty much the same as the 4001.

The next group started about August of '84 when the new style truss rod system was introduced. These also have split guards and body end adjusters but the neck blanks are one piece and tapered . That is, they are wider at the end button than they are at the headstock. The headstock increased in size around this time and gained wider wings (ears?) similar to the 60's basses. The tailpiece gained two extra screws to prevent "lift" and the pickups got a little hotter and the fingerboard was flattened out to a 10" radius.

The next group started in about '86 when the truss adjusters were moved back to the headstock (where they belong ). The 4003 platform took on some alternate forms with the introduction of the 4003S/5, the 4003S/8, and the V63. Several interesting limited edition 4003s appeared that include the Shadow, the SPC Black Star, the Tuxedo, and the Redneck. The .00047 cap was removed from the circuit around this time giving the 4003 a much deeper voice.

The next major group starts sometime in the early 90's when the bodies were first cut by CNC. At that time the upper horn took on a more slender and elegant appearance. The pickups got another boost in power and the molded plastic bobbin replaced the resin board / drive screw assemblies of the previous 2 decades.

The 21st century 4003s gained a little more pickup punch but lost the 4003S/5 and 4003S/8 options. Two different neck profiles and headstock shapes appeared. Walnut head wings (ears?) were added at around 2006. The pull pot was added to allow the .00047 cap to be cut into the tone circuit and the pickups gained adjustable pole pieces. My favorite change is the addition of the full width inlays. There was also the limited edition 4003 DCM made for the 75th Anniversary.

Did I leave anything out?

Great Info Ted

Along the lines of the evolution of the 4003
I'm interested to know when the fret gage changed
from the smaller 4001 like gage to the larger.

Did the 4003 always have the larger frets?

Big difference in the feel and sound IMHO

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:55 pm**

That is a good question and something I should have included. I think the fret wire changed sometime in the early 90's. I own examples from '81, '85', '86', '87, and '88 all of which have the small wire but as we know RIC changes are usually gradual. My '93 and '94 both have the larger wire (I think it is #149). So the 4003 came with the smaller size for probably the fist 10 years.

Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Model Of The Week 9.5: The BIG One -- The 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003

Re: Model of the Week Nine: The BIG one -- the 4003