Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

What were vintage Rics finished in?
What are modern Rics finished in?
When did it change?
Are Morris Export different with respect to finish type?
How about reissues?

Just curious..........

Vintage--up until sometime in '59, were nitrocellulose lacquer. At some point that year, conversion varnish came into use and became the cornerstone of the legendary bulletproof "secret" finishing system.

Modern Ricks are finished in CV (conversion varnish). The formula has been updated over the years, mostly to increase gloss, durability, and lower emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

Rose Morris guitars were built on the same line as regular Rickenbacker instruments, so the finishes were the same as other (USA) Ricks of the same time period.

Reissues are finished with whatever CV was in use at the time of the reissue.

325C58s, for example, are finished with CV, whereas in '58 they would have been nitrocellulose.

Thanks Paul,
I'm really digging the whole Rickenbacker thing and the more I find out about them the more there is to love.

I've been playing for 30+ years and been through so many guitars but mostly Teles but one guitar stands out the 360V64:

http://www.pbase.com/image/65185735

this is one, of 2, I owned a few years ago which I have since sold both for yet, another Tele. DUH????

One of my friends got the white guard one.

Well I just borrowed that guitar back and that was it...I had to get another RIC. I found an 81' 330 FG RIC with small headstock and vintage tuners which is getting toaster tops (which incidentally just showed up today). I really want to get the Pete Townsend LTD. or Morris "F" hole 1997 or 1998.

One of the main reasons I asked about the finish is that, if I'm able to find one that may need finish work, it's nice to know what the finish is. Many companies have all gone to poly - thick, hard, and a bear to work with.

I really appreciate all the info I'm getting on the forum.

I just got rid of my last Fender today, so I'm all RIC now. I can play anything on a RIC. They are not just a rhythm guitar as so many think.

For some reason I particularily like the 330 shape with vintage appointments, in all its variations. And an AC 30 doesn't hurt any..........

Kevin, as I remarked in another thread, the word "poly" is confusing. As many manufacturers use it, it stands for polyester, which is a catalyzing lacquer finish first used in the Orient as a fast way to put flawlessly hard, smooth finishes on pianos. It is thick (as you've noted) and impervious to nearly everything, save heat and stuff like hard acids. Paint stripper won't even work, because polyester finishes are 100% reactive and do not remain plastic in the same range of plasticity as the OTHER "poly", polyurethane, of which conversion varnish is one example.

Both are a way of plastic-coating wood with a spray-on, room-temperature-catalyzing material that is self-levelling.

So If I understand correctly, a Rickenbacker finish can be removed for restoration a little easier than these super hard thick finishes used by many other guitar manufacturers??
Thanks for clearification.

As you said some finishes are just too much trouble to even consider striping.

A Rickenbacker finish is easily strippable chemically, provided you avoid the binding on bound guitars.

A polyester finish is best removed carefully, with abrasives. A couple of years ago, I stripped and refinned a MIM Fender Duo Sonic. The only way to strip it was very carefully--flat areas on a large (20") disc sander, and edges by hand. Took two full days.

Never again.

Thanks Paul

So Paul, asking you to refinish a MIM Strat is out of the question?

Not out of the question. Just pricey, because I'd strip it and you'd have to pay for that time.

Is the CV finish more resistant to damage than your typical nitro or acrylic lacquer finish? Is it a harder finish?

The CV is definitely more damage resistant.

Yes, CV is quite tough. In my experience it is tougher than polyurethanes. Nitro, on the other hand, is not tough at all but very easy to repair. Believe it or not, CV's main use is as a coating for caskets. Cabinet manufacturers use it on high end kitchen and bathroom casework. I don't know if it used much in marine applications though. Epoxy seems to be king there.

CV is one type of polyurethane.

Perhaps you mean "tougher than air-dry polyurethanes", in which case I'd have to respond, "yes and no". Depends upon the air-dry polyurethane.

CV's advantage over air-drys is that it converts (cures) rapidly through a catalyzing reaction, and does it very quickly compared to air-dry urethane, which depends upon oxidization (combination with the oxygen in air). For this reason, it can be applied a good deal thicker than air-dry, because it cures through its entire cross-section, not surface-first. It can also be built-up into a nice thick film with multiple applications, with the only caveat being susceptibility to thermal shock.

CV would never work in a marine application; its heat resistance and resistance to "the elements" that a boat experiences are both not good enough. For interior applications, however, it's tops.

The best marine epoxies are formulated to "chalk" just like expensive house paint.

I guess when I think of polyurethane I think of Fender and PRS finishes. If that is air-dry poly then yes, that is what I should have said.

Ok, Paul, you got my attention. Why would expensive house paints (stains?) be formulated to "chalk"? I though chalking was a detriment? I have a vested interest here as I am deciding on stain for the deck and house and tired of the oils chalking after about 3 years.