Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

A good friend of mine went through three 4004Ls made around 2008 and downright hated them... that's when I started noticing other QC complaints related to them. When I finally played my first one in 2009 I think the issues were sorted because I never played a lemon 4004.

aceonbass wrote:

ricaddic wrote:A 4003s would be cool, and the possibility of it materialiseing ? it could happen, but the price, you can bet your bippy it will be much more than a typical 4003, cause just like a 4001C64 etc, it will be considered a specialty model, and the price will be way up there, unless the factory or dealer is in fantasy land, be prepared to dig deep and stretch big..

I don't buy that idea at all. The standardization between the two models makes a 4003S easier and therefor less expensive to produce. The neck blanks will now be the same. Therefor a completed neck for a 4004 would be the same as for a 4003S. While a true 4003S set of body wings would be different than for a 4004, it's easier to have them contoured via CNC machine than to bind them. Although I don't have a bippy, I'll still bet that a 4003S would be no more than a 4003, and probably less. Untill the new 4003S makes it's debut,

Although as you say, its still the same to cut and maybe yea to a point, it wont be a regular 4003, for one reason, the S at the end of 4003, this is a now discontinued model, and therefore, just like a V63, C64 OR C63S, would be a vintage reissue thus would be reason to justify a premium price, so as far as costing the same or less as a regular 4003, In the words or word of Dr Evil (Austin Powers) RIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHTTTTTTTT !!!!!!!!!!.

aceonbass wrote:I talked to Richard at RIC a few weeks ago and he told me that the 4004's would share necks with the 4003's from now on.

I assume he was talking about the 4004L only. The 4004Cii now has a figured maple neck, so perhaps he was referring to the 4003 and 4004L models sharing necks.

ricaddic wrote:Although as you say, its still the same to cut and maybe yea to a point, it wont be a regular 4003, for one reason, the S at the end of 4003, this is a now discontinued model, and therefore, just like a V63, C64 OR C63S, would be a vintage reissue thus would be reason to justify a premium price, so as far as costing the same or less as a regular 4003, In the words or word of Dr Evil (Austin Powers) RIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHTTTTTTTT !!!!!!!!!!.

John Hall has talked in the past about how RIC arrives at a certain price on an item. The factors discussed involve materials, R&D, changeover of tooling , ammortization of costs, etc.... That something is a reissue, or more accurately a REPRODUCTION isn't what is factored in. RIC doesn't charge more for reproductions because they can (look what other mfgs. charge for their reissues), they charge more for these types of instruments becuase there are actual, material reasons to do so. The C series had a long lead time involving research to make them more accurate than the V63. The routing was correct, the tuners were correct and so on. These things added cost to the basses as well as the guitars I'm sure. Making a 4003S wouldn't cost RIC any more to produce that a regular 4003, and it fact should cost less. I suppose RIC could charge more for them "just because", but that's not been a factor in pricing between models before. Unless this hypothetical 4003S was made to look like a specific year from the distant past, I don't think you could call it a vintage reissue anymore than the current Chevy SS Camaro is a vintage reissue of that car. A dot board, mono, 4003 without binding was an S model before, and it would be again. It was less expensive before, and I believe it would be again.

I love your passion aceonbass, and I eally hope your right and that would be the case, however, I would have to see before I belive it, I dont think it will be...

coolhandjjl wrote:The original 4004 necks have that cool angled heel cut. Is that gone by the wayside now?

The angled heel is still a feature of the 4004 basses. It looks slightly different now, because of the narrower width.

So the Cii models have reverted to straight-grain maple for their necks? That's a shame. imho, figured maple on a Cii neck enhanced the whole "top-shelf" and "high-end" vibe of the series, and it just looked so right on the Cii. Glad I bought mine when I did.

superdick2112 wrote:So the Cii models have reverted to straight-grain maple for their necks? That's a shame. imho, figured maple on a Cii neck enhanced the whole "top-shelf" and "high-end" vibe of the series, and it just looked so right on the Cii. Glad I bought mine when I did.

Many guitar builders will tell you that the plainer the maple used for a neck, the more chance it will remain stable.

I can vouch for that; my Tele with a bird's eye maple neck had to go back to the luthier about six weeks after it was refinished and re-assembled. The luthier forewarned me that this would happen.

rickenbrother wrote:

superdick2112 wrote:So the Cii models have reverted to straight-grain maple for their necks? That's a shame. imho, figured maple on a Cii neck enhanced the whole "top-shelf" and "high-end" vibe of the series, and it just looked so right on the Cii. Glad I bought mine when I did.

Many guitar builders will tell you that the plainer the maple used for a neck, the more chance it will remain stable.

Yeah, I've heard that too. From Fender sources and Sadowsky sources.

Once you get into laminate necks I think that becomes even more of a factor than the grain though. I've said it before, I'm really happy RIC is doing laminate bass necks again.

rickenbrother wrote:Many guitar builders will tell you that the plainer the maple used for a neck, the more chance it will remain stable.

I've heard this as well. I'm thinking the two truss rods that Ricks have, as well as Alembics, will keep them stable in the long run.

aceonbass wrote:

rickenbrother wrote:Many guitar builders will tell you that the plainer the maple used for a neck, the more chance it will remain stable.

I've heard this as well. I'm thinking the two truss rods that Ricks have, as well as Alembics, will keep them stable in the long run.

And in the case of my 4004Cii, I believe the sheer size of the neck contributes to it's stability.
The neck on my 4003 is more narrow and thinner than my Cii neck, and it requires seasonal truss rod tweaks, while the truss rods on my Cii have not required any adjustments once the neck settled in.
Say what you will about chunky necks, but in my experience, a chunky neck is usually a stable neck.

Richard, I'm sure that with the 2 piece lamination of the neck with the double truss rod and RIC's quality standards, that your neck with be stable. My 4004Cii Blueburst has a highly figured maple neck stock.It has a one piece neck, it was made in 2005 and it's straight as an arrow. I only made that previous statement because there is merit to plain looking maple.

rickenbrother wrote:Many guitar builders will tell you that the plainer the maple used for a neck, the more chance it will remain stable.

+1, I learned that from Rick Turner.