Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I don't recall seeing this posted before.

Paging Dave Pascoe, Jason Mendelson, paging Dave Pascoe, Jason Mendelson!!!

Very impressive work, turned out beautiful. Makes my back ache looking at it!!

Now that's a right proper way to void 2 warranties. Very nice work.

Outstanding.

Why is there such gaps around the body binding? Why didn't he fill them in with the wood putty stuff he used on the wood joints? Also, the finish looks like it needs to be buffed out. Otherwise it is accurate repro. I was VERY impressed with his long scale copy of Lennon's V81.

Fantastic!
Ted, void 2 warranties? I thought it doubled the warranty.

byu wrote:Fantastic!
Ted, void 2 warranties? I thought it doubled the warranty.

Hey Bill! I have been meaning to call you.

That finish doesn't look very glossy though, it looks almost matte in some of the pics....or is it just me?

That old public school hippie has a lot to answer for...

Ooh dear. That was a bit like watching two close friends being sawn in half and glued together. I'm torn (pun intended) between admiration for all the effort he has put in and wincing horror at the wholesale butchery involved.

His binding looks rather clumsy, too.

Seen it. I think it's great. But he totally used the wrong guitar for it. Mike's (and remember this is apocryphal knowledge at best) was...

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=383870&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

aceonbass wrote:While the 360/12 would have been the "correct" guitar to use, the 620 was easier since it was a solid body of the same thickness as the 4001. I'm surprised he'd go to the extent that he did on the replication and not go with FWI's, vintage truss rod covers, a vintage bridge pickup surround for the 4001 and the "gap tooth" cut on the tailpiece. Although it wouldn't have been "correct" I'd have used the upper half of the 4003. This would have saved considerable time and effort and helped the instrument to balance better.

Looks like a 6-footer to me...Dane and I discussed this one at NAMM, surrounded by beautiful Ricks, and Dane's 100% correct. In addition, why go through all of the trouble of filling the back of the headstock, "for accuracy", when the accuracy of the project was compromised anyway, in the final stages?

This is another case of "JG seen as being able to hide defects", when, in fact, every seam and repair will soon become glaringly evident. This point aside, the finish should be like glass, not semi-gloss "zombie-shine"--this is freshly-done JG's biggest appeal, and one reason why RIC is quickly moving toward UV-cured clearcoats for everything--no shrink-back to dull the finish.

1/8" binding around the sound hole and body? Lots of trouble, unnecessary, and plain wrong. When scraped to its full width, it's obviously way too wide for either sound hole or body binding. 1/16" binding is tough enough for sound holes, but at least the results would be correct.

This could have been a Grand Slam, but it's a bunt, because of the unclear thought processes. I think it's funny/odd the decisions that people make when attempting this sort of project, and the rationalizations that they come up with for making the wrong ones.

Paul, the glass-like finishes you have posted here have ruined us forever! That is the standard!