Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

In response to your comment, John, at this point, we've already established that RIC indeed constructed the basses this way for an indeterminate amount of time. Offering up the "Voided Warrantee" smoke-screen with a condescending attitude doesn't appear to have satisfied this particular customer. The bigger issue here is RIC's accountability when compensating customers who have received a flawed instrument, specifically a design flaw in this case. To say that basses with this same design were produced and sold in multiple numbers doesn't discredit the fact that they're flawed. Hypothetically speaking, if 10,000 basses were made this way, that just means that there are 10,000 basses out there with the same predisposition to buckle under the tension of what has been shown as a warrantee approved gauge of string. It will be interesting to see how many others with a bass designed and constructed like this have the same neck problem.

To interject, are D'Addario Chromes or GHS flatwounds high-tension enough to void Rickenbacker warranty?

Does anyone have the tension measurements for factory Rickenbacker strings?

Thanks for that, Rick.

deaconblues wrote:To interject, are D'Addario Chromes or GHS flatwounds high-tension enough to void Rickenbacker warranty?

Does anyone have the tension measurements for factory Rickenbacker strings?

I had Chromes (40-55-75-95) on my 4001V63 for a few years with no issues, they were excellent, actually. I have no experience with the heavier gauge version as I prefer light gauge/low tension strings.

So, explain this to me. What does his warranty being voided, even if under strange circumstances, have to do with the fact that he still returned the bass? Rickenbacker accepted it, and sent it back saying it was fixed, is Ben trying to say it wasen't fixed properly because his warranty was voided so they only half fixed it? There's parts of this story that don't make sense.

I've used GHS Precision Flatwounds 45-105 on both my '80 4003 and '82 4001S for YEARS with zero problems.

I'd like to see more pictures of pu cavities from the time frame of what Mr. Hall is referring to. Sure does look like there is excess material routed away.

If it were my bass I would re-route a cleaner pocket, glue a new maple block in and then route a new pu cavity.

johnhall wrote:I guess quite a few people are going to be shocked when they look under the pick guard of their basses made in that era and discover they were made the same way. This dates back to the CNC fixturing done by Grover Jackson where the left and right halves, as well as the central neck portion were all machined separately. The central slot was different specifically to accommodate a clamp and alignment block, whereas the "wings" were held during cutting by vacuum... Said differently, all three of the parts were slotted separately, each to the dimensions required to get the job done, and then glued up.

That's pretty fascinating, as my 2008 4003FL was built like this and I always wondered what the heck was going on there. Makes sense now that I've heard it explained. I take it the new ones are CNCed as a whole body/neck assembly so this artifact has gone away?

Reading the thread a bit more I'm confused what JH is referring to vs. Mark. I can't see the pics so I'll wait until I'm somewhere I can load them. What I am referring to is the CNC routs on my 4003 not totally matching up between the neck block and the body wings, but it had no practical effect on anything. What Mark is describing sounds different.

deaconblues wrote:To interject, are D'Addario Chromes or GHS flatwounds high-tension enough to void Rickenbacker warranty?

Does anyone have the tension measurements for factory Rickenbacker strings?

My 2008 4003FL had its warranty voided in 2009 when I thought I had neck relief issues (it was really an unlevel fingerboard that got sorted out later, the neck is just fine) because of a .060'' Chromes D string. I thought this meant the warranty was void forever but was later told no, it was just void for that one Return Authorization and could be sent back with the proper strings. By that point I did not need to however.

If RIC factory strings are similar to D'Addario Nickel XLs the tension is around 160 lbs with less in the middle compared to the outer two strings. Personally I have always thought this was not the greatest approach to take with string gauges, but I played skychurch's 4003 a few times with the stock strings and it seemed good. Typically you want balanced tension with a little extra mass in the interior if necessary because those strings may not get as much represenation from the pickup, hence the popularity of 45-65-80-100 sets (Jazz Basses, probably the most common of all basses, are awful about having weak D string output so that string gets the most tension).

cassius987 wrote:I thought this meant the warranty was void forever but was later told no, it was just void for that one Return Authorization and could be sent back with the proper strings. By that point I did not need to however.

Huh. Interesting.

Ok so after a night of rest, I figured I'd examine my other basses...

Here's my 05 4003 (same year as my C64S)

congerz83 wrote:Ok so after a night of rest, I figured I'd examine my other basses...

561595_10201675261794361_664201008_n.jpg

That looks a little high still. It's impossible without a ruler but I'm guessing 3/32'' or 1/8''.

I can see your other pics, I guess I misunderstood what we were talking about earlier because I've never seen routing like in the C Series pic. The 4003 pic looks very familiar.

cassius987 wrote:

congerz83 wrote:Ok so after a night of rest, I figured I'd examine my other basses...

561595_10201675261794361_664201008_n.jpg

That looks a little high still. It's impossible without a ruler but I'm guessing 3/32'' or 1/8''.

I can see your other pics, I guess I misunderstood what we were talking about earlier because I've never seen routing like in the C Series pic. The 4003 pic looks very familiar.

That's what I'm saying. It is high also set-up about a year ago by Mandolin Bros about a year ago.

AND hung in my climate controlled living room, by it's neck on a string swing.

congerz83 wrote:Ok so after a night of rest, I figured I'd examine my other basses...

561595_10201675261794361_664201008_n.jpg

Wow, that is a poor job!

Too much wood removed to have a strong neck joint for the engineer in me.

Somehow, RIC learned how to make a trouble free neck joint in the early 70ies then forgot about it when they reintroduced the modern version of the 4001. It will be interesting to see how the new crop of 4003 ages with the years. The surface area on the bottom wing neck joint is ridiculously small. Maybe owners of new 4003 are better to put spaghetti noodles strings to make sure their warranty is not voided?

congerz83 wrote:

cassius987 wrote:

congerz83 wrote:Ok so after a night of rest, I figured I'd examine my other basses...

561595_10201675261794361_664201008_n.jpg

That looks a little high still. It's impossible without a ruler but I'm guessing 3/32'' or 1/8''.

I can see your other pics, I guess I misunderstood what we were talking about earlier because I've never seen routing like in the C Series pic. The 4003 pic looks very familiar.

That's what I'm saying. It is high also set-up about a year ago by Mandolin Bros about a year ago.

AND hung in my climate controlled living room, by it's neck on a string swing.

Did you ever store the bass within 10 m of a pack of strings with a ultra high tension (read, higher than 160 lbs...)?

You may have caused the wood some "stress"...