Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I've noticed on a few sites displaying 2010 4003s (and reviewing the RRF Register) that the neck now joins higher than in 2009. It's now right on the end of the neck - it's similar to a 4001C64, but possibly (even allowing for the binding) even closer to the end of the neck. There also looks like a slight difference in the pickguard curve where it is closer to the body end from near the switch onwards. Anyone else noticed this in real life, or know of a reason for the change?

2009 on top and 2010 below

We seem to be talking about a difference of around 1/4" and I think that is well within tolerances for a hand-finished instrument. The important things don't change: length of the neck-through slab upon which is mounted the tuners, fretboard, and tailpiece/bridge. Before the hardware is installed, the body wings are glued onto the center slab, and these body wings are what is really different among the examples in the photos. Since they are cut, bound, and sanded (to some extent) before they are attached to the body, the slight differences in position is tolerable. The pickguards shown are likely the same shape, but if the body wings are slightly different, the position of the pickguard in relation to the edge binding will look different, too.

And I don't think this is anything new. Vintage Rick basses show differences, some much more than seen here.

With the 2010 it is probably easier to play high-register notes. Maybe that's a reason for change. I have no idea whether this kind of difference is well within any sort of tolerance, or not.

Paul, I’m slightly concerned that you appear to be defending something which I am not in any way attacking. I am not implying that this shape is an acceptable tolerance, I’m just displaying a healthy interest in planned Rickenbacker trends, like slimmer horns, longer headstocks etc. etc.

Nope, just trying to explain that this may not be a "change" at all, and that instruments made tomorrow may not be exactly like any you've shown. I don't think it is a change in design or direction, but more a random happenstance, and that you're likely to see this kind of variation at any time. Here's an example: Here are Tony Cabibi's '78 Autumnglo 4001 (left) and '81 Walnut 4001. Look at the differences of the position of the body wing joints in relation to the fretboard -- almost a full fret's worth. So, I'm saying, don't count on this being a change; they're just different.

What about camera angle? These are all CNC made instruments so the variations the pictures appear to show should not exist short of a programming change. Which I doubt. Grab your camera, be about 3 ft. above your Rick, then move left/right a tad and see how much a difference a small distance move makes on the appearance of where the wings meet the neck.

I like seeing all the subtle changes on Ricks. Makes it very interesting.

rickenbrother wrote:I like seeing all the subtle changes on Ricks. Makes it very interesting.

+1

I know what people are saying about camera angles and mayb e that's it, but I'm also looking at the way the upper horn curves down towards the neck. What I see on the 2009 is a continuous curve compared to the 2010 which seems to straighten out (but not completely) a nearer the neck, say from around half way. It's quite subtle and rather nice. This is a pattern I notice on early Ric's up to and through the 70s, maybe the factory have reprogrammed the CNC machines and have gone over to that shape now?

I noticed what Mark is talking about back when this bass was being discussed: Actually, I think I noticed a little earlier but this one really made me go back and check other recent 4003's because the checkered binding made the change more apparent to me. I think it's a CNC change.

Not necessarily good or bad, but I think the horns might be a tad slimmer as well.

rickaddict wrote:I think the horns might be a tad slimmer as well.

They look the same as this '08 4003:

jps wrote:

rickaddict wrote:I think the horns might be a tad slimmer as well.

They look the same as this '08 4003:

I disagree, sir. I think the upper horn on the JG (which is the 2010) in Mark's example looks just a tiny bit slimmer than your '08, and I think where the wings meet the fretboard is a bit further up as well. Compare body wings on your JG vs the 2010 JG pictured above against the 20th fret. That's not a camera angle illusion. And this is not the only bass like it either.

I agree the treble side is cut shorter, but I think the shape of the upper horns are pretty much the same.

rickaddict wrote:...I think it's a CNC change...

If it is consitent with at least 2 basses, then I strongly assume a CNC-Change. Otherwise I could think of the first part cut at adaption of CNC installation, a real so called "prototype". AH, collectors item!!!