1960 4000 replica

[RobRick]

I made no demands. I simply wanted to know what the specific inspiration was. I'm no "fan boy". If I don't like something, I'll say so and qualify it with a reason.

Fair enough. Maybe Jake will indulge you.

[s4001]

Just for the sake of discussion, here is a bass that may be more true to the desired result----this bass has a 1962 serial number and has features from both the old and new era of model 4000 basses. IMO the biggest change made in those days was when Rickenbacker went to thin body designs for their entire line of instruments in mid-late 1961, when the basses got a thin body as well. So maybe call it a "62" replica instead..?

[s4001]

I like it. Headstock is a little wild for me, but in all, I'd rock it. Heaven knows I've made mods to my '68 and most here have modded, so carry on and enjoy your unique bass!

[rickenbrother]

I like it. Headstock is a little wild for me, but in all, I'd rock it. So carry on and enjoy your unique bass!

+1

[antipodean]

Great project Jake - congratulations on the outcome - it looks fabulous!

Kudos to you for having the courage to do something different!

[rickaddict]

...and there's nothing rare or remarkable about a 4003s...

HEY!

[rickaddict]

Cool bass, Jake.

Congrats and enjoy!

I vote for a pinup girl on the pick guard like this one:

http://www.rickenbacker.me.uk/www.ricke ... ls.html#19

Chicks are cool!

[weemac]

Its a gutsy conversion, but it really worked! (I'd love to hear it)

emac.

[chrisdski]

Great project Jake - congratulations on the outcome - it looks fabulous!

Kudos to you for having the courage to do something different!

+1!!

[superdick2112]

Jake, she looks great - congrats! Let's hear some clips please.

[egosheep]

Some interesting comments and questions. Here are my thoughts.

Well, let me start with the "destroy a perfectly good bass like this" line. First, I want to state that there are plenty of 4003s basses out there, and I personally don't have any problem with anyone modifying a bass the way they see fit. People put in different pickups and refinish basses all the time. This went a bit further than that, but really how much further than replacing all of the hardware and the finish, and reshaping the wood? Not all that much further, I think. That said, this was far from a "perfectly good bass" when I got it -- as you can see in the "before" pics, it was stripped down to bare wood and sanded down in several spots. Since it'd been played without any finish, the wood was grimy and nasty in a few places in a way that you could never clean. Almost none of the original parts were on it, and the electronics had been resoldered so many times that the harness was barely salvageable. The tuners were all but frozen, and the bridge had been filed in an awkward attempt to adjust the action. So what's the appropriate way to restore this? If you cover the nasty wood with a solid finish, you still have the goofy amateur reshaping to look at. My point is, this bass needed a ton of work anyway, and there's nothing rare or remarkable about a 4003s, so why not make it into something a little more interesting? (Especially when the cost of restoration would have just bought a much nicer 4003s.) It has nothing to do with legitimacy or avoiding copyright infringement, and everything to do with taking a dog of a bass and making it into something cool.

Second, you talk about the only things "original" being the neck and the jackplate, and that's true, but not all that different from a lot of other restorations -- and it ignores the fact that as many parts as possible are authentic RIC parts. It took me two years to get the right parts, and most of them are even from the right era (most of the tuners, wiring harness, surround, magnetic shoes -- I had a pickup that didn't work out, too). The TRC is a legit gold plexi TRC that goes on RIC's own reissues. The other parts are as faithful a replica as I could find (good luck finding an original bridge for one of these). We've seen tons of basses converted to look like a pre-73 4001, RIHS pickups used to sell for huge money around here for the vintage look ... aside from the new wood (replacing damaged wood), how is this different except for being an homage to a different era?

There's some fantastic attention to detail here that isn't apparent in these pictures, including "deleting" the 19th fret marker, squaring off the neck heel (not perfect, but very good given the constraint of working with the original neck), the 3-ply nut, etc. We made a few concessions for parts that we couldn't find an original or good replica of, and I'm sure that you could have built a more accurate bass starting from scratch with unlimited resources, but that's not what this is. If I could have afforded that, I would have just saved up to buy an original. Instead I took a bass that I wanted to restore, and we turned it into this.

Jake sorry if my previous comments came off the wrong way. I think your project is really cool and I like the bass, I think it's awesome. Many of us here would love to oneday own something like this, since a reissue will not be forthcoming. It would be great to take a 330 with a broken body and have a Capri body made for it. I'll admit it's not something I ever would have thought of before now.

I guess I was just saying since so much work went into it, that you may have gotten a better result by making a neck as well, having the whole thing done up custom. I wouldn't think that would cost nearly as much as an original, but maybe I'm wrong about that. As you explained, you were setting out to modify an existing messed up bass, so... cool!

I also noticed you got the body edge bevels right... that's an important part. I would also love to hear how it sounds with that magnetic horseshoe!

[Grey]

Well the difference being, making one using parts from a real Ric is kosher here, you don't have to hide in those evil custom-ric building circles.

Splitting hairs if you ask me, but that's how it is.

[gshadoan]

/lurk mode off
Dane wrote.
Looking carefully at it, almost everything about it is wrong.

I agree. It looks like a copy.

It's your bass, and cool if your happy.
/lurk mode back on.........

[jaymi]

I say who gives a (*&%^#$&^!!! It looks like fun....go play it and enjoy it and don't worry about people's opinions....

[RobRick]

/lurk mode off
Dane wrote.
Looking carefully at it, almost everything about it is wrong.

I agree. It looks like a copy.

It's your bass, and cool if your happy.
/lurk mode back on.........

Um, it IS a copy. In a sense. That's why the word "replica" is in the thread title.