Page 4 of 11

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:10 am
by kcole4001
Just a side note: I wasn't singling anyone out, it's merely my opinion that, in a perfect world (which we have the closest example on this forum), it's nice to be gentlemanly about these things.
No offence intended, Elys, or anyone else!
Image

Now, back to our previously scheduled ogling!

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:35 am
by lyle_from_minneapolis
I'm curious about the tuners. Do they really resemble the originals? Did closed-back Grovers come and go in later years?

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:56 am
by xsubs
The tuner shape and design is very similar. The differences are: originals would be "reverse" wind; originals were nickel plated not chrome; all screws on the originals would have been regular instead of phillips; and the "Rickenbacker" name was not stamped on the body.
The C64 tuners would have been better, as they are almost identical in every way.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:59 am
by lyle_from_minneapolis
Thanks Sean.

Wish the exploding Grovers never happened...it would be easier to re-fit my '72 with the same screwholes... ah, well.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:33 am
by aceonbass
Vince, after you add this bass to your collection, I would like to buy the reissue RIC tuners from you if you don't need them please.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:06 am
by simer4001
The seller hasn't given me an address of where I can see the bass. He said today at the earliest. We'll see.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:02 am
by brycycle
Vincent, nice to see you posting on the forum.

i'm sure your first-hand experience/expertise will prove to be very helpful in regards to instruments such as this one.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 12:14 pm
by jps
O.T. again!
I have not seen a lefty 60’s 4000/4001 for sale, in a collection, on stage or in any book. I did see a 60’s 4005 that was a left-handed model. I never inspected that 4005 in person so I cannot be sure it was original but the photos I was sent made it appear correct.


Peter Levett has a lefty '60s 4005. He came here to get it from the villainous Chicago Music exchange.

Image

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled program. Image

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:52 pm
by elysrand
Kevin, none taken! Image

Mark, the switch from the reverse nickel Klusons mostly used in the 60s to the Grovers was done for a variety of reasons, and for the longest they were a really superior tuner, but when the quality of Grovers plummeted after they moved production from the USA to "Somewhere In Asia" in the middish 70s, John Hall said he dropped them like a hot potato.

On the bright side, just re-swage the pins on loose Grovers and they will work as good as new - no need to change them out. Except for pros who change strings every day or every week for a long time, or the occasional abuse case, I have never seen a set wear out. I have done a little extra swaging to all my vintage Grovers at one time or another just to make sure they are tight -usually at the same time I do the first truss rod scrapedown, polish, and shrinkwrap on a new acquisition.

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:59 pm
by vincent_gallo
Dear Dane, i just pulled a set of reissue RIC tuners from a 63 bass. They are like new and a gift to you. Where should I send them ?

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:22 pm
by elysrand
That is a genuinely nice thing to do for a fellow Forumite, Vince! Well done sir, and my hat's off to you Image I will pull a couple of pins out in your honour tonight (serious grin of friendship)
Image

And if you ever need a set of tuners pulled out of one of my 63s, you are welcome to them, Vince!

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:22 pm
by gray
That is very nice, indeed! My hat's off as well!

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:16 pm
by herk
so nice

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:44 pm
by bob_atherton
Why is everyone being so nice....?

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:05 pm
by chucksimms
OK, Jeff, I have to ask: why is Chicago Music Exchange so villanious? I desperately want one of the guitars they have listed but I think it's a little (perhaps even a lot) overpriced.