Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

sloop_john_b wrote:Larry, of course, stands by his work and I will be sending this back to him next month for a more drastic fix. I'm not sure what that will entail yet, but I have all sorts of wild ideas - perhaps a whole new neck/body core?

John, sure the neck wood is not balsa??

It's actually marshmallow!

Fingers crossed for a whole new neck but Larry sez it's probably not necessary.

Sent it back to Larry today.

Bummer.

Aww man, again?!

Hope it can get sorted out, really hope it can be saved

Yep, again.

Watch out for those circa-1999 instruments when buying used, folks. Seen a few "odd" instances lately.

I believe this basses neck issues can be traced to the fact that so much material was routed out of the fretboard for poured full width inlays. Because more material is routed on the bass side, that side is weaker, requiring more tension on the bass side rod. This extra tension is too much for this particular piece of maple, which is why the rods are pulling into the neck. A brass thrust block at the body end up agaist the route below the fretboard similar to early 4003's would have been the proper solution. This solution would require longer truss rods, and can still be done. The solution that was chosen with the smaller thrust block inserted into a route was inadequate due to its smaller size and inadequate load bearing capacity. The work it took to get it there was overkill, and unneccarilly expensive.

Not so sure that this can be blamed on the poured inlays, Dane.

Non-reinforced polyester (approx. 50% styrene), which is what the poured inlays are typically made of, exhibits a compressive strength of approximately 20,000 PSI.

Bubinga (species Guibortia) typically is about half that (10,000 PSI), so the fretboard in compression should actually be strengthened by the inserts.

Hopwever, we need to also consider whether the inserts have shrunk (polyester shrinks .005"/inch in 1/2" pours with 4% catalyst). The inserts are typically only 1/4" deep before machining, so shrinkage would be less due to lesser cross-sectional thickness. Additionally, a good deal depends upon the bond between the polyester insert and the end-grain of the bubinga rout, which would prevent shrinkage and separation.

I think most of this is due to the neck wood. I do agree that in such a case, a wider block of brass or even stainless steel, buried at the body end, would help with the rod adjustment.

In this case, my vote would be to replace the neck with one of a harder piece of maple.

aceonbass wrote:If poured inlays are stronger than the fretboard wood, then why do all stock RIC five and eight string basses have dot fingerboards?

Correlation is not causation, but that is an interesting point. On the other hand, my 4003/5 (customized by Paul, so it still has triangle inlays) is handling >200 lbs of string tension just fine so part of me wonders if the variability in maple necks isn't as big or bigger a factor, somewhat like Paul suggested.

aceonbass wrote:If this bass didn't have these issues before the FWI's were done, then I'd blame it on the inlays. Perhaps John can comment on that.

I'm afraid I don't know. Not only has it been seven years since Dale had it, but I was far less savvy about these things at the time.

I will say that several folks have contacted me privately in response to this bass' soft wood problem to relay their own tales of woe to me; all of the instruments in question are from the same era.

[quote="cassius987"
Correlation is not causation, but that is an interesting point. On the other hand, my 4003/5 (customized by Paul, so it still has triangle inlays) is handling >200 lbs of string tension just fine so part of me wonders if the variability in maple necks isn't as big or bigger a factor, somewhat like Paul suggested.[/quote]



On most "normal basses, it's easier to sheer the truss rod than it is to actually pull the nut through the wood. Being able to actually pull the nut into the neck and compress the wood says to me that there is an issue with the wood. While correlation may not be the only factor in identifying these instruments it certainly casts a very bright light on the possibility that this phenomenon may be associated with a bad or soft batch of lumber, especially if the dates of manufacture are all very close to one another. That or the truss rods on these instruments are all made of unobtainium and are pushing the wood past it's physical capabilities.

Sepp

Kopfjaeger wrote:On most "normal basses, it's easier to sheer the truss rod than it is to actually pull the nut through the wood. Being able to actually pull the nut into the neck and compress the wood says to me that there is an issue with the wood. While correlation may not be the only factor in identifying these instruments it certainly casts a very bright light on the possibility that this phenomenon may be associated with a bad or soft batch of lumber, especially if the dates of manufacture are all very close to one another. That or the truss rods on these instruments are all made of unobtainium and are pushing the wood past it's physical capabilities.

Sepp

I think you misunderstood my post a bit Sepp, as my correlation example was more about the role of inlays in these problems (suggested by Dane, who I quoted) than the wood. Considering the variance in performance between different necks like in the case of my 4003, I too think wood quality is strongly implicated as the deciding factor in these cases. But Dane may have a point about inlays too.