Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

OK, I know it's just wishful thinking, but.....if the neck specification of the 4004 is now the same as the 4003 then how difficult would it be for RIC to offer a 4003s model. I realize they have streamlined their operation with less models and color options (for very good reasons) but with the end of the C series and any other vintage offerings at the moment, I think a new 4003s would be a very easy way to offer a variation on the 4003 theme without the high price of a vintage series.
The current neck with walnut headstock wings would look great and give a little of a vintage vibe but the rest would be pure current RIC excellence. Adjustable pole pieces, push/pull tone pot, and top notch fit and finish.
Alright...daydream over....back to reality

Is that true? 4003 and 4004 necks are the same now??

Yeah John, I think that news came out some time last month.

After posting, I remembered the fretboards are different. Bubinga vs rosewood. But I think it was the dot inlays on the 4004 that got me thinking there would be easy interchangibilty. Maybe giving the 4003s a different fretboard material would work?

RIC "rosewood" fretboards are bubinga. Another name for bubinga is "African rosewood"

cjj wrote:RIC "rosewood" fretboards are bubinga. Another name for bubinga is "African rosewood"

+1. I think the reason RIC might not designate the 4003 as having a bubinga fingerboard is simply in case of a drop in supply, they aren't bound to using it and can pick a related species as a substitute.

I picked up a FG 4003s last fall in mint condition. Neck is super slim and straight. I never really cared for the 4001c64 reversed headstock, so if Ric re-issues the horseshoe, or I come by one for a reasonable price, I've got my own special version of a 4001v63. (Last 4001v63 in FG on eBay went for over 3 grand, and it was a very late 1990's model IIRC, not sure if it had the thinner neck, but probably not, at that mfg date.)

As John said previously, a v63 recently went for over 3K! I guess my point in all of this is that if RIC can offer two versions of the 4004 then you'd figure it's only right to have two versions of the 4003. And considering the current economic conditions a modern 4003s would seem like a more attractive addition to their line up. It'd be priced in line with the existing 4003 and give those of use who prefer no binding, dots, and mono but still want the look of a classic 4001/3 an option.

coolhandjjl wrote:.... it was a very late 1990's model IIRC, not sure if it had the thinner neck, but probably not, at that mfg date.)

My '97 V63 has a decently shaped neck on it, so not all later Vs have a stout neck.

johnallg wrote:

coolhandjjl wrote:.... it was a very late 1990's model IIRC, not sure if it had the thinner neck, but probably not, at that mfg date.)

My '97 V63 has a decently shaped neck on it, so not all later Vs have a stout neck.

+1, my April '98 4001V63 has a neck that is virtually the same as that of my March '73 4001.

I would love for them to bring back the S series. I had to use all of my willpower to not buy a 4003s five string on ebay recently, and would order one of those in an instant.

'99 and beyond seem to be the "fat neck" V63s... maybe some in late '98? My 2000 V63 has a chubby neck, but it's a great bass, and the neck is nowhere near as thick as that on my '71 P-bass...

I like 4003S's!

antipodean wrote:'99 and beyond seem to be the "fat neck" V63s... maybe some in late '98? .....

That's what my research on the forums seemed to indicate. Thanks for clarifying. I wonder if that was for all RIC 4xxx in general? (aside from the 4004)