Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Check this one out. Cream, stereo, and a certain "Squire" resides in Surrey...Couldn,t be...could it....

Nah, it's not his. The horseshoe was replaced with a high gain and it looks pretty beat up.

Also, the pickguard cutout for the toaster looks pretty rough.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2545743493&category=4713

Chris Squire's original 4001? You wish.

Yeh...just kidding. There,s enough documentation about CS,s original to know that this was never the real thing...however it does look like someone a long time ago wanted a Squire copy using a real 64 (possibly..) So if you want a CS edition that bodily IS closer to his original (especially in terms of neck radius) here,s your chance....

Are the open back tuners correct for this replica? I thought the older ones all had closed-back Grovers.

If I were the seller and had no evidence of age, I wouldn't indicate anywhere in the ad that it might be of 1960s origin. I saw a similar 'Squired' bass on eBay a year or so ago, and that seller, the modifier of the bass, had documented all the changes he had made to make the guitar as close to an original CS as possible.

It looks like a 60's rick for sure, it has the square heel, and the tailpiece is unmistakeably "vintage".......someone just thought they were chris squire thats all.

The treble pickup looks a bit odd.....and the guys used strap bolts/mute screws on the pickup screws.....now whats the point in that?

Call me skeptical but it looks to me like a 4001CS that has been at least partially re-finished and scruffed up to look like a much older bass.

The tuners are consistent with a 4001CS (I have one), the headstock finish in the middle is a slightly different color (it looks like the 4001CS color to me) than the rest of the bass. The headstock badge isn't original and there is no serial number. Why would converting the jack to stereo neccesitate changing out the jack plate? I'm thinking if the serial numbered plate were on the bass it would reveal the basses true age, which is why the jack plate was changed.

A real '64 4001s would of course be worth much more than a 4001CS which could motivate someone to pull off such a scam.

On the other hand maybe I had too much coffee this morning.

Pricey.

Also, the scratchplate has no finger rest or holes for one, which the 4001CS doesn't have either. I suspect the scratchplate is a copy made off the 4001CS' and whoever made it lacked the tools or expertise to properly cut out the hole for the toaster....

Man... I have had too much coffee.

i dunno, it looks legit to me. The 60's basses had similar tuners to currenet ricks, its the early 70's that had the square ones (yes?) and the bridge is an old "rough" one, i think its a 64

Robj, I do believe you're on to something here (besides the coffee!). There are just way too many things that don't add up.

i dunno, it looks legit to me. The 60's basses had similar tuners to currenet ricks, its the early 70's that had the square ones (yes?) and the bridge is an old "rough" one, i think its a 64

The tuners look like 60,s to me...old tarnished nickel klusons..if they have slotted screws securing them, then they probably are genuine. The truss rod cover is the same as my 64..made in u.s.a. under the Ric logo. The real deal would be to see under the pickguard. Any fireglo there? Are the holes there for the thumbrest? When do the pots date to? These things would tell us a little more..and would be essential to someone wanting to seriously buy @2.5K sterling...

BOTH pickups look odd. I suspect they are not legit.