Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

This pretty 4001c64 has some significant taillift. Read that this model is known for that. Does the bridge differs from a v63 and cs because those have less.
Any solution for this other than a new bridge?

I used to clamp the black bridges with succes but this is of course different material.

Thanks!

It's the same material, just chrome plated vs. black powder coated.

The tailpieces on the V63 and CS basses are 5-screw models; the C64 has a 3-screw tailpiece.

I restraightened a worse-bent 4003S/5 tailpiece in this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=161788&hilit=tailpiece&start=60

I also added the two extra screws as suggested earlier in that thread to ensure that it would not it again, but that might be something you probably shouldn't do on yours.

I have this lift on my '89 JetGlo 4003, reluctant to take the bridge off as I can see broken paint round the front.

My old July '73 4001 had a bit of tail lift. It was never a problem in any way, structurally or sonically.

doctorwho wrote: Wed Apr 24, 2024 2:38 pm I restraightened a worse-bent 4003S/5 tailpiece in this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=161788&hilit=tailpiece&start=60

I also added the two extra screws as suggested earlier in that thread to ensure that it would not it again, but that might be something you probably shouldn't do on yours.

Too bad the pics aren't visible.
Did you really have 33mm tail lift? Over an inch and a quarter? Seems impossible!

Isaac wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:41 pm

doctorwho wrote: Wed Apr 24, 2024 2:38 pm I restraightened a worse-bent 4003S/5 tailpiece in this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=161788&hilit=tailpiece&start=60

I also added the two extra screws as suggested earlier in that thread to ensure that it would not it again, but that might be something you probably shouldn't do on yours.

Too bad the pics aren't visible.
Did you really have 33mm tail lift? Over an inch and a quarter? Seems impossible!

I own a 4001 C64 jetglo from 2009.
I have about 4 mm of taillift on the tailpiece.
I took it of and clamped it down as doctorwho suggested.
It took about a week to get it back straight.
After putting it back on and restringing it, the tailpiece stayed
that way for a month or so and returned slowly to to the taillift again.
Since it's just an esthetic "problem" i decided to leave it as is.
Soundwise it doesn't seem to have any influence.

jps wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:00 am

Isaac wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:41 pm Too bad the pics aren't visible.
Did you really have 33mm tail lift? Over an inch and a quarter? Seems impossible!

Tail Lift 01.jpeg
Tail Lift 02.jpeg

Wow! I can see how it might be difficult to play that as it was!

This has been gone over before, but the prime offenders in the "tail lift" tale are the old five-screw black-anodized tails from the '80s. I don't know the science, but apparently the anodization process weakened the metal and when stressed, the tails yielded at their weakest point and started to, not just lift but FOLD! Those photos illustrate the severity of the problem. To solve the problem, two more mounting screws were added near the string anchor point. This new seven-screw design was carried over to the chrome-plated tails as well. Further redesign of the tailpiece precluded the need for the extra screws.

When RIC made the 4001C64 retro model, they emulated the original three-screw tail to keep the esthetics of the 1964 4001. Not a good idea. Even the new structural design couldn't cope with the limited anchoring of the three screws underneath the bridge. Thomas Wolfe said "you can't go home again" but in this case, maybe you shouldn't try!

bassduke49 wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 11:51 am ...When RIC made the 4001C64 retro model, they emulated the original three-screw tail to keep the esthetics of the 1964 4001. Not a good idea. Even the new structural design couldn't cope with the limited anchoring of the three screws underneath the bridge. Thomas Wolfe said "you can't go home again" but in this case, maybe you shouldn't try!

But weren't the three-screw bridges used in the original 60s models also made from metal that could be counted on to not bend?

Apparently, the original design was aluminum (or some aluminum alloy - don't know) and didn't lift. The first change was to a zinc alloy which lifted some. Further redesigns reinforced the castings, added more mounting screws, and reduced or eliminated the tendency to lift. Nearly all of the newer ones (before the V2) appeared to lift ever so slightly, but in many cases, the tail end of the tail (?) sits over the sanded edge of the body which may not necessarily be flat either. It's rare that a tail piece lifts to the point that it affects break angle over the saddles and thus playability.

I have the exact same tail lift amount in all these photos in my '09 C64 so I'm pretty sure this is the maximum amount it's going to lift, given the angles and forces from the strings. It's been 15 years for me now and it hasn't gone beyond that and hasn't affected intonation.

bluewhale wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2024 11:50 pm

bassduke49 wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 11:51 am ...When RIC made the 4001C64 retro model, they emulated the original three-screw tail to keep the esthetics of the 1964 4001. Not a good idea. Even the new structural design couldn't cope with the limited anchoring of the three screws underneath the bridge. Thomas Wolfe said "you can't go home again" but in this case, maybe you shouldn't try!

But weren't the three-screw bridges used in the original 60s models also made from metal that could be counted on to not bend?

The original cast aluminum TP's were much more robust. The bridge was the weak point on them.

Many of us have wanted to see a re-issue of the sand cast aluminium tailpiece and bridge. It was a better material which didn’t warp like the zinc ones and it looked better for having just the three screws concealed under the bridge. The only “drawback” as far as I can tell is that it was more costly to produce in terms of labour hours. I have had two replacement tailpieces on my CS one of which was the three screw C64 tail. The most common reason for the lift with the structurally weaker zinc tails seems to be from over tightening the three screws under the bridge where there is the slightest gap between the underside of the tailpiece and the bottom of the wood channel slot that the tailpiece sits in.A simple shim solved it for me. If someone out there could produce an aluminium reproduction suitable for both vintage and modern 4000 Series basses it would fly off the shelves!