Page 1 of 2
Fireglo 330 - different look
Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 10:50 am
by clearblue
I was looking at a new 330 12 in fireglo and hadn't seen this before. The center part of sides were not painted the solid red like the top edges. It was the same color as the center of the body. I've noticed that a 1996 model in Amber Fireglo had some of the sides like this as well, but this was on the outer edges and not the center.
Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 2:40 pm
by jingle_jangle
This'll be a rare one--it's RIC's new painter learning the ropes...
Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 4:04 pm
by clearblue
More vintage looking? New painter?
Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 9:29 pm
by ben_hall
Oh, did someone say something about a new painter? This is true, and the sides of FG's being left white a la 1996 is by design.
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 4:58 am
by jingle_jangle
Thanks, Ben. Another potential mystery solved.
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 5:01 am
by beatcomber
The center part of sides were not painted the solid red like the top edges. It was the same color as the center of the body
I was unaware that this is unusual on newer Rickenbackers. That's the way my '84 330 was finished, and that's how it was done in the '60s.
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 7:02 am
by johnhall
Bingo, a cigar for Glenn please!
Actually it's not "just a new painter" but rather a new, very experienced boss for the department that we were quite lucky to hire.
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 1:55 pm
by stubby
Any pictures of what these new fireglos look like?
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 2:54 pm
by mdbuck
The characteristics of the 60's FireGlo is the reason I, myself, would name the color 'FireGlo'. Perhaps this is why it was named this? Notice the edge of my 366/12...
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 2:54 pm
by rumbush
Apparently not limited to the 330 or to FG (pretty obvious that it wouldn't be), here's an example in AFG if I'm not mistaken:
Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 3:03 pm
by mdbuck
That is a beautiful example of the subject, Rumbush...
How about a striking difference between old and new as in my '67 366/12 and my new '06 360.
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 4:17 am
by rumbush
Wow, pretty profound differences between those two FGs. The geometry of the guitars looks quite different as well - or is it just the angle from which the pic was taken?
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 5:18 am
by webhead
It looks like the right cutaway on the older one joins further down the neck than the newer one.
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 5:26 am
by randyz
Most of the differences are due to the different number of frets (i.e. 21 frets vs. 24 frets). The longer fretboard on the 24 fretter effectively moves the pick-ups closer together.
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 5:27 am
by beatcomber
You can't really compare the finish on a 39-year-old Rick to a brand new one. The '67 has changed over time. It may well have looked closed to the '06 when it was new back in '67.