Where the rubber meets the road

[Ric N. Backer]

I put this in another thread due to the discussion, even though it was slightly 'off-topic.'

I thought it might warrant its own thread due to the subject matter. Anyone else have a similar observation or other thoughts? This might make for an interesting discussion...

You tell me...
Except for stripe, rods, name and two extra screws these are the same basses.
Wim Vanderstraeten (wim)

hmmmm....so except for (1)center stripe (2)truss rods (3) name plate designation (4) two piece different pickguard with xtra screws...they are the same bass ??? same basic design appearance but different contruction implementations. when i first saw a two piece pickguard/two piece neck rick at "the music shop" in thornhill, ontario, i did a massive double take. did not even know until joining this forum that the truss rods were switched 180 degrees. i had read about re-designed truss rods, but it never really specified what was really going on except for "allowing the use of round wound strings" . i can see how they wanted to beef up the amount of wood in the neck to body area, but the current 4003 has me worried as they have pulled back the body wings in that area to the point that the lower wing edge now meets the pickguard at the end of the fretboard. this means less side lamination against the neck so now all the strength is in the center section.

I know what you're saying.

Look at the difference regarding how far up the wings extend on the 1982, 2009, and 2010 models (4003). It's diminishing (receding hairline ). I also
included the 'other' fellow which incorporates the neck-through design for comparison.

Diminishing stock around the neck kind of makes me a little concerned about the neck's structural integrity - especially long-term.

1982

2009

2010

"Other Fellow" 2004

[superdick2112]

"Diminishing stock around the neck kind of makes me a little concerned about the neck's structural integrity...."

Get yourself a 4004Cii. I'm betting the neck on mine is strong enough to be used as a car jack - its almost twice as thick as the neck on my '08 4003, and wider as well.

All kidding aside, I don't think the lowered wings would adversely affect structural integrity, as the majority of tension on the neck is front to back, & not nearly as much side to side. The neck should be able to fully handle the string tension even with the body wings removed.

[Grey]

I can't see how this could even possibly be a problem. Rick's are neck-thru-body, where the fretboard (which sits ontop of the neck) meets the body is largely irrelevant from a structural standpoint.

I'm sure Paul will chime in at some point.

[rickaddict]

As far as the aesthetics are concerned...I prefer the old look.

I guess I'm a crusty, curmudgeonly, old, fuddy duddy, but I think the horns have become too thin. And the relative lack of exposed body protruding from beneath the pick guard near the neck joint doesn't look as "good" to me.

I prefer this one:

http://www.rickresource.com/register/vi ... lebrity%3D

Perfection.

Why change it?!

[BrockBNoe]

That's exactly what I'm thinking, Why change it? Why bother making the horn thinner? What's the purpose?

[Grey]

Ask Gibson, they haven't been able to make the SG's horns the same since the 60's.

[Ric N. Backer]

As far as the aesthetics are concerned...I prefer the old look.

I guess I'm a crusty, curmudgeonly, old, fuddy duddy, but I think the horns have become too thin. And the relative lack of exposed body protruding from beneath the pick guard near the neck joint doesn't look as "good" to me.

I prefer this one:

http://www.rickresource.com/register/vi ... lebrity%3D

Perfection.

Why change it?!

To me, that's ALMOST perfection.

Put a horseshoe with a V63 surround, and you got yourself one hell-of-a spectacular bass.

Maybe if we're good, Ric will reissue this sweetheart - checker-binding and all!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to take another look at that baby!

Oh, here's an idea. Issue a matching set of 4000 & 4001/3 basses with these coveted features.

Get in line ladies and gents....

[rickaddict]

To me, that's ALMOST perfection.

Put a horseshoe with a V63 surround, and you got yourself one hell-of-a spectacular bass.

*Urp!*

I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth!

String access on mine, please.

[Ric N. Backer]

To me, that's ALMOST perfection.

Put a horseshoe with a V63 surround, and you got yourself one hell-of-a spectacular bass.

*Urp!*

I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth!

String access on mine, please.

Better get a napkin.

[songdog]

As far as the aesthetics are concerned...I prefer the old look.

I have to say I'm with you on that... maybe because I'm so used to my '72 4001.

It would be interesting to see pictures of the three 4003s and rickaddict's 4001 with the pickguards removed. I would think any possible structural issue would have to do with the body wings providing bracing around the neck pickup route. With the different pickup placement and new truss rods, do the latest 4003 models have more wood in the body near the end of the fingerboard?

As for why Rickenbacker keeps making these incremental changes - maybe it's so regular readers of this forum can identify the year of a bass just by glancing at it!

[cassius987]

I can't see how this could even possibly be a problem. Rick's are neck-thru-body, where the fretboard (which sits ontop of the neck) meets the body is largely irrelevant from a structural standpoint.

I feel this way too. My 2010 4003 is perfection in all ways regarding setup.

[Ric N. Backer]

I can't see how this could even possibly be a problem. Rick's are neck-thru-body, where the fretboard (which sits ontop of the neck) meets the body is largely irrelevant from a structural standpoint.

I feel this way too. My 2010 4003 is perfection in all ways regarding setup.

Joshua, does that mean that everything up to and including the current 4003 revision is less than stellar?



Most things are in fact relevant. You, even pointed that out with respect to the two jack outputs for the bridge pick up - regarding tonal differences.