Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

The fingerboard looks strange to me.

Never saw that before???

Take a look at the photo of the back of the neck, it's not a through neck. Copy me thinks..

The fingerboard looks darn ugly

Most 4000's were a set neck design. I'd ask for photo's of the truss rods.

I must bow to your greater knowledge here Scott, thanks for that.

Could it be that the fingerboard was replaced or maybe a fret job to a fretless?

Fretless 4000's are very rare, Gary has one, I don't think his has a bound neck either. It maybe has had a fretjob as the fingerboard is very dark but that would not explain the bound neck either, he said the headstock is also bound.
The bound portion looks like stock Rickenbacker binding.

Looks stock to me. See how the binding covers the edge of the fret. Either that, or someboy put a lot of quality work into a mod.

I must say the wood looks way too dark and the binding just a touch too thick. If it is not stock, and it might well be, I agree with Wes that someone did a good job.

The darkness would come from having the finish taken off, I have a 4001 that was re-fretted years ago and is dark like that. But if it was re-fretted the binding most likely would not cover the edge of the fret as mine doesn't. It looks stock to me too, but that still doesn't explain the bound headstock although I have heard of a few 4000's made like that during the late 50's, early 60's.

Some Ricks have dark boards but the dots don't look right to me (one size too large perhaps). The binding work is excellent but I don't believe it to be factory done. The instrument is genuine but has been repaired/altered. One of my neck binding jobs was recently taken as factory work. You can't go by that alone.

What Ted said....maybe somebody had the usual "accident" with the rods and decided to replace the whole board and add binding...

I seem to remember a rumor of a few ebony boards leaving the factory. Maybe this is the case.