Page 1 of 4
What do you think of this???
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 4:25 pm
by krick
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 4:48 pm
by jingle_jangle
Wow. My first thought was "converted 6", but the headstock is about 3/4" longer than a 6. Nickel-plated tuning machines, interspersed with chrome plated banjo tuners points to a worker-built guitar, not necessarily a factory prototype.
Something hinky about the TRC, too...the lettering looks off but the pics are too tiny to tell.
"Factory doesn't want to talk about it" is an interesting embellishment.
Anyone else?
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 5:07 pm
by BobKat
What in the bloody hell?
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 8:33 pm
by dean712
Yikes!! Dicey...
Does it pass the sniff test? Would need more info. Dissing the Ric factory in the initial advertisement is a big stinkbomb.
Would you buy a used car here?
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 9:56 pm
by 8mileshigh
It reminds me of the strange Richard Thompson Ricky......
I still don't think it's genuine.
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 10:00 pm
by jingle_jangle
God, was Richard ever that young and smooth? And--who shot out the lights?
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 1:24 am
by jwilli
I'd want clear closeup pics of the headstock, front and back. The heel is square. The answer awaits in the company logs.

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 4:43 am
by 8mileshigh
I'm not too sure about the ric o sound pic. Serial number looks odd? Stereo output? and the binding too white. Could be just the pic but I feel uneasy about this one.
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 4:48 am
by Scastles
According to the RIC site is was made in May '64
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:18 am
by jingle_jangle
Or at least the jack plate was.
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 7:46 am
by patrickkelly
Or at least the jack plate was fabricated to look like it was...
The pictures are horrible. Some people are their own worst enemies. Unless there's a reason why they're so bad...
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:19 am
by route66guitars
I'd be interested to know who this person is, as his story does not match what I know about the guitar.
Someone tried to sell this instrument to me, in person, when my shop was in Hollywood, 11 or 12 years ago. I have photos of it somewhere.
The neck has been replaced, as has the one on Richard Thompson's guitar. There are plenty of examples of 1960s 360s with factory replaced 1970s necks to know how this was typically done. These replacements were not done by the Rickenbacker factory.
The rest of the guitar, except for the replaced tailpiece, dates as a May '64 360. There are a few 'domestic' models from this era with the 'F' hole. My guess is it started out as a 6 string that someone chose to 'upgrade,' but John Hall could verify this if he were so inclined.
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:22 am
by jingle_jangle
Scott, you are the Gray Eminince of Rick Knowledge. This all makes perfect sense now.
Man, those banjo tuners are ghetto...
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:29 am
by route66guitars
Don't everyone freak out that I bid on it. It's the only way to get the contact info on the seller.
Gray Eminence, eh? Makes me sound old... It does sound better than how my friends introduce me, "This is Scott, he used to be 'the man'"...
Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:29 am
by circles
Would there have ever been a six string, with white binding and f-hole? I figured the binding was a dead giveaway for a RM model 1993.