Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I have 3 new (2010-2012) 4003's and just traded with a great forum member Col Sanders for a 1990 4003. I just compared the body shapes. I really had a hard time seeing the changes in the shapes when looking at pictures so it is admittedly subtle but it looks much more substantial when they are side by side. I really dig the older body style, were the reasons for the changes due to anything in particular or was it just general cosmetic changes over the years?

Well, in the old days, they used templates to guide the routers or whatever to finish off the shape. The templates wear after a while, producing subtle changes over time.

With the modern CNC machinery, this shouldn't happen...

The very late 80s and early 90s upper horns are quite wide (due to the worn template jigs), where the 2010-current basses have the slimmest upper horns since the mid-60s. Rick made a CNC change to the current slim about that time.

johnallg wrote:The very late 80s and early 90s upper horns are quite wide (due to the worn template jigs), where the 2010-current basses have the slimmest upper horns since the mid-60s. Rick made a CNC change to the current slim about that time.

That is really cool. What a great aspect of Ric history. I gotta say it is ever so slight when you look at them one at a time but when you put them together..... it is really noticeable. It is cool because they have changed over time due to use of the template.... makes me want one from each decade to observe the changes.

johnallg wrote:...where the 2010-current basses have the slimmest upper horns since the mid-60s...

...in my view the slimming is much more than the mid-60s were, too much of a good thing!

Not a fan of the modern super-slim horn. The template theory is interesting but the shape changed quite drastically in the late 80's well before CNC technology, the shorter horn became bigger and sharper and then it changed back.

I think the late 60's through early 80's Rickenbackers look the best, the thicker horn balances the body design quice nicely (from an aesthetic standpoint) and the smaller horn is just right.

Grey wrote:Not a fan of the modern super-slim horn. The template theory is interesting but the shape changed quite drastically in the late 80's well before CNC technology, the shorter horn became bigger and sharper and then it changed back.

I think the late 60's through early 80's Rickenbackers look the best, the thicker horn balances the body design quice nicely (from an aesthetic standpoint) and the smaller horn is just right.

Yep, but for me it's late 60's to early 70's. Then the early to lateish 00's

But like you, not a fan of the recent ultra slim horns.

Scott, I am really happy you enjoy the bass!

Love the super slim horn personally.

I like the slim ones much better than the fat ones. Wait, are we still talking about guitars?

teeder wrote:I like the slim ones much better than the fat ones. Wait, are we still talking about guitars?

basses

Colonel Sanders wrote:Scott, I am really happy you enjoy the bass!

Thanks Jeff! I love it. The Fretless 4003 goes out tomorrow or Monday depending on how cooperative the USPS wants to be. You da man Jeff!

inconsistent :varying and unpredictable.