Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I had the chance to visit Wilcutt Guitars in Lexington, KY, today and play a 4001C64-FG (10/2009), a 4001C64S-MG (09/09) and a 4001C64S-JG (also 09/09). All were beautiful instruments, but I had to give the "playability" nod to the S models. The overall finish on the FG C64 was gorgeous and the glossy finish on the fretboard really made it pop. However, the neck was noticeably thicker than either of the others and the finish on the back of the neck felt, for lack of a better word - tacky. I just could not feel myself really cooking on that bass. I've had the same issue with my '08 4003 MID, but it was much more evident on this bass.

By comparison, the feel of the satin finishes on the S models was superb, although the fretboards were visually less arresting than the FG. Both neck profiles were smaller, although slightly different in profile (the JG being more D shaped, the MG more C).

While 2 of these 3 basses were poorly setup, the tones produced by the toaster and horseshoe PU's was awesome - far more varied than any of the hi gains I've played on 4001/4003's. In the end, none of the three reached out and grabbed me by the throat quite enough to compel me to trade in the '08 4003. Still, it was a great way to spend an hour and change.

Matt B.

I'm really surprised you noticed such a difference in the necks. But then again as Scott Pope pointed out to me (when I was equally shocked that my friend Derek's 4003 had a wider neck than mine from the same year), the necks are still profiled by hand... Or so I believe.

Matt, get yourself some Zymol car wax and put a couple coats on the 4003 neck and see if that makes it more to your liking. Adds "slip".

I have used steel wool on the back of necks to make them like satin then rubbed out the satin with zymol. Makes for a very smooth feel but still looks factory finished.

Maybe I'm overly sensitive to neck shape/size, but it's much easier to feel differences when they're side by side.

After I finished up a Scratch-X and Zymol program on my '80 4001, I found that the neck was much "tackier" than it had been so I was hesitant to Zymol the neck on the new 4003. Maybe the steel wool/Zymol treatment is the way to go. Anyone have other suggestions short of baby powder?

MattB wrote: After I finished up a Scratch-X and Zymol program on my '80 4001, I found that the neck was much "tackier" than it had been so I was hesitant to Zymol the neck on the new 4003. Maybe the steel wool/Zymol treatment is the way to go. Anyone have other suggestions short of baby powder?

I wonder what went wrong. I've Scratch X'd and Zymol'd at least 10 of my Ricks and it has always made the neck slick as ice.

I also give a quick rub-down after I play a lot with the RIC polish cloth and some Jim Dunlop 65 guitar polish, which also helps the cause:

http://www.jimdunlop.com/index.php?page ... aintenance

Matt, those satin necks on the C64S are definitely sweet. I played a couple at Pick of the Ricks in NJ and really liked the neck. I recently purchased a C64 MG and have found that it's a lot quicker with the TI Jazz flats than the stock round wounds. I can glide up and down the neck very quickly with no issues. So I feel I've achieved the best of both worlds with looks and playability on the C64. If you get a chance to play a C64 with flats you might be quite pleased with the feel.

Odd that the C64 neck was so much noticeably thicker - I wasn't aware that the two models intentionally were made with different neck thicknesses. Maybe someone can chime in on this - perhaps the September C64 got some thicker necks for whatever reason (mine is July and is as thin as the C64S' that I've played.

I'm thinking two things: 1) RIC necks are all hand-sanded and do vary from one to the next, even when they're from the same batch. 2) RIC bass nuts are cut a bit high...But the zero fret on the C64S gets the action as low as it can get down by the nut...chances are any 4003 or 4001C64 as it comes from the factory won't have the action as low near the nut as a C64S does. This can make the neck feel larger when it might not be.

The D vs. C shape I'd have to take Matt's word for, but I believe it. My C64S is D shaped, but I've played some that are C shaped.

My 4001C64S has a one piece neck, while my 4001C64 has a two piece neck, that may explain the different width and shape.

Well, I don't really know why the C64 was thicker, but it was. The S basses had similar dimensions but were just shaped a bit differently - testament to the hand shaping I would venture. Heck, I even measured the darned things with the wife's metric sewing tape! (I've got the specs if you want 'em for the table John). From the consumer point of view, I will say that the lousy setups kept me from pulling the trigger on any of them. I sensed that the S basses would play like dreams with flats and proper action but it was hard to be sure in the shop.

BTW, I hit the neck of my '08 MID with Scratch-X only tonight. I'll see how that feels then try Zymol. Chime back in if either approach gets me to the "sizzle" point.

I got both mine from POTRS so the set up was and is great on both basses, I have TI flatwounds on them, and WOW!

FWIW, I checked out an "S" a couple years ago and it was extremely comfortable, and I'm way picky on neck dimensions.

VRICKY63 wrote:I have used steel wool on the back of necks to make them like satin then rubbed out the satin with zymol. Makes for a very smooth feel but still looks factory finished.

I do the same periodically on my 4003S. It eventually ends up shiny again. That baby is my war horse, so I'm not worried about messing up the finish, but I wouldn't do it to my S/8, and definitely not the CS.