Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

On closer inspection, the two V63s pictured in the Smith book are indeed two different basses, So perhaps Bob's is the one in the color shot!

I wonder why the original bridge was swapped out for the newer 5 screw vintage reissue bridge, when clearly it had a real '60s bridge in it to begin with?

"The 4001V63 was publicly announced 9/15/84".

Talk about perspective, that was my wife's 4th birthday.

Ronn,that would make your wife 25years old?if so you dirty dog ,LoL

I have an 84 that i still use quite a bit. I believe that I have one of the first V63 FG's. The neck is very round and chunky and the fireglo is much different from the current FG. I also have a C64 (one of the first shipped) and it is quite different in sound, color, feel, dimensions, and price!

Ronn, say no more [you lucky dog]

Bob, keep us updated with what you find out - early v63's are my favorite topic.

Ed - please post pics of your 84 V

I think this might be my last post on this matter. I have given my bass a really good look over and there are signs that the tailpiece/bridge has been changed at some stage.

I know I am never going to covince Ken that the bass in the colour shot of the Smith book & mine are one & the same. They are. If you hold my bass up to the photograph in the book you can see that the grain in the wood is EXACTLY the same, QED in my book.

Why an early V63/proto ended up in the UK I can only guess. Does anybody know why the photo in the book was taken in the first place?

I've just got back from playing a gig with my 4001, and I'm afraid it just didn't cut it like the 'new' bass. It is much bigger sounding, and has a chunkier neck, which I prefer.

Why does it have a s/n from a diferent instrument?

I don't think I will ever get to the bottom of this, but it has been fun trying!

Thank you for all your input, informed comments & good humour.

Bob

Bob, there's no need for you to convince anyone. Please continue your research and post your findings. There's nothing better than the history of these great basses. The V63 is a great bass, especially the early models that we have with the special horseshoes IMHO.

As I've said once before - the 84/85 V's are truly vintage - add to it an original HS and what more needs to be said!

cheers!

Definitely continue the research. In the Ferrari world, research is always going on about various models to get to the bottom of their stories. Various highly regarded historians debate things ad nauseum until the truth is found. In many cases, engines and even chassis serial numbers have been swapped among the cars so it is not easy at all to staighten things out, but the research continues!

I for one, believe the color shot in Smith's book and your bass are the same, as wood grain is just like fingerprints.

I for one, believe the color shot in Smith's book and your bass are the same, as wood grain is just like fingerprints.

I agree.
I will ask this again. Is the neck 2 pieces
running the full length? It appears that way to me. It wouldn't be the first that I've seen, but again not very common.

bob,you don't need to convince me of anything we are all trying to find out whats up, but there are major inconsistency's with Rickenbacker's we all don't quit understand we discuss things ,at time heated ,at times agreeably and disagree this could be the same bass in the book that doesn't make it a v63 if the dates don't line up it cant be ,we know that from jh, it would not be a prototype no larger headstock or walnut wings it could be a b-series but these did not come with a horseshoe it could be a 4003s with vintage appointments, and could be a special order.it is a very beautiful and unique bass and it is your's be happy with it and keep investigating why not

Thank you for your kind support. I got back from a gig last night & felt a bit low. Don’t worry though I will not whiter on about this bass for ever!

My final ( I think ) conclusions are… This bass started life as a 4003S body. In the Ric factory, for whatever reason, they maxed it out with vintage ‘furniture’. I’m sure it was never a completed 4003S, as there are no extra holes for scratchplate or TRC.

Ken , it has a two piece neck, fitting I guess with the above supposition.

In or near the factory it was photographed. At some stage the 60’s bridge was changed.

It has now appeared as the colour photograph in the Smith book accredited as an early 4001V63. It probably isn’t. I’m guessing it was a proto for the ‘new’ model.

Whatever it is, it is probably almost unique, & I am a very proud owner.

On a slightly tacky note I had better put a value on it for insurance. No one has asked me how much I paid for it. Thank you for being so polite. Any ideas as to it’s insurance value?

I will try & research the colour photo in the Smith book. Rest assured if I find out anything you guys will be the first to know!

Take care, Bob

PS Ken, just seen your post. Thank you, I understand your heart is in the right place.

Bob -

You and I are brohers in RIC.

http://homepage.mac.com/baltimucho/PhotoAlbum1.html

bob, when i talk about b-series it is sort of the first vintage series read up about the b-series that may be a good possibility .jh can be very busy contact Kenny Howe[at Rickenbacker] ask him to find out if yours is a b-series.they were sort of a vintage series without changing anything but hardware kinda like yours.