Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

rickaddict wrote: Another argument in favor of the value of a PW restored instrument is that he builds (and finishes) Rickenbacker acoustic guitars.

Trying to guess what the value of one of his restored Ricks would be vs. an original one is difficult though because as far as I know...nobody has ever tried to sell one yet.

Mine for instance (my first Rick) won't be for sale until I'm gone, so its value is unimportant to me.

I can tell from the pictures that the finish work appears to be superior to any of the factory basses that I've seen. My first Rick is my 4001 and I agree, I doubt it will go away until its willed to my oldest son. I let him borrow any of my other basses except for my Rick's and Carvins anyway. Ok FYI, I have 2 boys from a 1st marriage, 25 and 28. The twins are from the 2nd marriage after the boys moved out.

I may have to talk to him about my 4001. Its trashed. Plays great but its got huge amounts of paint missing from the back and neck inflicted by a very good friend of mine whom I got it from.

rickaddict wrote:I think your bass did come from RIC the way that it is.

Again, I'm with Jeff. Factory. Nice photos too. That 5 pole Bridge pickup construction is period correct but a rarity as it would be a first for 5 poles.

Jeff, those truss rods have nuts at both ends, with the adjusting truss nuts at the body end - they are the early 80s reverse rods. Scooter, I would still adjust them with the aid of bending the neck to where you want it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the bass itself is a factory 5 string 4003. The maple fretboard on the other hand, from things Paul pointed out, there's a good chance it was done later. Some of the photos look like a refin was done, and not too perfect either. But I suppose some things like the bad masking of the fretboard in the pictures could be due to the digital camera effects (the earlier pics looked like the maple was completely covered).

So, Scooter, does the masking really look like the pictures, or is it actually cleaner?

Of course, there are other things that Paul pointed out as being non-RIC too, which makes the fretboard highly suspect.

Still, looks like a fairly rare bird. You could always get Paul to do a proper refin and put on a proper fretboard.

cjj wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if the bass itself is a factory 5 string 4003. The maple fretboard on the other hand, from things Paul pointed out, there's a good chance it was done later. Some of the photos look like a refin was done, and not too perfect either. But I suppose some things like the bad masking of the fretboard in the pictures could be due to the digital camera effects (the earlier pics looked like the maple was completely covered).

So, Scooter, does the masking really look like the pictures, or is it actually cleaner?

Of course, there are other things that Paul pointed out as being non-RIC too, which makes the fretboard highly suspect.

Still, looks like a fairly rare bird. You could always get Paul to do a proper refin and put on a proper fretboard.

the pictures are pretty accurate.

Can you feel any ridge between the jetgo and the maple fretboard where it was masked, or does it feel smooth?

rickaddict wrote:Can you feel any ridge between the jetgo and the maple fretboard where it was masked, or does it feel smooth?

there is an extremely small one that I can barely detect. Its less than on my 4001. Also the step is not quite at the edge of the black but seems to be between the black and the binding. I've debated even giving an answer to this as I don't know if it clears up anything.

You've got to remember I do high precision machine work with tolerances as small as 50 millionths of an inch. A step to me might not be a step to you, I can feel steps less than .001".

At this stage I'm tempted to take or ship the instrument to the factory and ask them to determine if its been butchered and if they can fix it if it was.

kssound wrote: there is an extremely small one that I can barely detect. Its less than on my 4001. Also the step is not quite at the edge of the black but seems to be between the black and the binding. I've debated even giving an answer to this as I don't know if it clears up anything.

You've got to remember I do high precision machine work with tolerances as small as 50 millionths of an inch. A step to me might not be a step to you, I can feel steps less than .001".

At this stage I'm tempted to take or ship the instrument to the factory and ask them to determine if its been butchered and if they can fix it if it was.

I think it's valuable information to the puzzle, and I think a guy like you that has done precision machine work as you describe makes the info more credible.

I'd like to hear what JH has to say about it, cuz the fretboard/frets/binding on this bass screams RIC to me.

Not meaning to step on my friend Paul's toes here but the rest of the fretboard masking looks RIC good to me. Isn't it possible that one Rick bass might have left the factory with less than perfect masking in that few inch area on top of the neck near the body?

rickaddict wrote:

kssound wrote: there is an extremely small one that I can barely detect. Its less than on my 4001. Also the step is not quite at the edge of the black but seems to be between the black and the binding. I've debated even giving an answer to this as I don't know if it clears up anything.

You've got to remember I do high precision machine work with tolerances as small as 50 millionths of an inch. A step to me might not be a step to you, I can feel steps less than .001".

At this stage I'm tempted to take or ship the instrument to the factory and ask them to determine if its been butchered and if they can fix it if it was.

I think it's valuable information to the puzzle, and I think a guy like you that has done precision machine work as you describe makes the info more credible.

I'd like to hear what JH has to say about it, cuz the fretboard/frets/binding on this bass screams RIC to me.

Not meaning to step on my friend Paul's toes here but the rest of the fretboard masking looks RIC good to me. Isn't it possible that one Rick bass might have left the factory with less than perfect masking in that few inch area on top of the neck near the body?

Well, I went home early today with a screamer headache and wanted to double check the "step". I was wrong, there is a step at the edge of the binding and there is a change in the radius about 1/8" up/down??(away from the frets) where you can easily feel the change in the radius. There is no step in the finish at the masking line of the black.

has anybody ever heard of a fake Rick?

Are there any pictures available of 4001/4003's under the pick guard?

is there a chance its not really a Rickenbacker at all?
Thanks,
Scott

kssound wrote:has anybody ever heard of a fake Rick?

There are lot's of fake Ricks out there but yours is not one of them, your is just a slightly modded real one.

Like I said in the Appraisal section, I really think if that maple fingerboard was factory, it would have have black dot fingerboard markers.

Anyone have a mid 80's 4003FL that can post a pic of so we can see the white or pearl dot markers that RIC was using then?

jps wrote: There are lot's of fake Ricks out there but yours is not one of them, your is just a slightly modded real one.

I hope your right on that. I've been trying to get a comparison of other similar instruments by looking at the pictures in the registry. I've been surprised at several 4001's with the jetglow paint that their masking looks the same as mine with a clear paint over wood gap between the binding and the color. I've also noticed that with the ones that you can see it clearly that they are just about as strait as mine is.

Can anyone provide pictures of the electronics/pickup cutouts in the body?
thanks,
Scooter

Here are some pics from my July '73 4001:

Note the red wire that is bypassing the .0047 cap.

Here are a couple photos of my 2003 4001C64S with the pick guard off. Not the best comparison, but might be helpful:

(Once the image comes up, click your mouse on it for an extreme close-up.)

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

Unfortunately, I don't have a 1980-'86 4003 to show the truss rods.

Here's a shot of the side of the neck on my Burgundy '79 4001 that shows that the finish doesn't go all the way to the binding; some of the side of the fretboard peeks out:

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

Here's a shot of dot inlays on an '87 4003S:

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg