Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

The reintroduction of a much slimmer neck on the 4005V has made me curious as to what might be in store for the 4003 and 4003S. Is anyone aware of a similar change for these models?

I'm also wondering if crushed mica fb inlays will eventually be transferred over to the 4003.

bassdroid wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:46 pm The reintroduction of a much slimmer neck on the 4005V has made me curious as to what might be in store for the 4003 and 4003S. Is anyone aware of a similar change for these models?

I'm also wondering if crushed mica fb inlays will eventually be transferred over to the 4003.

As far as I'm aware, Ric did slim down the 4003 & 4003S necks considerably over the past 2 years. As a 4005V owner, I'm certain the necks on all 4003 models are now the slimmest they've been in decades.

Good question about crushed mica being used on 4003's in 2025. NAMM is next week, so we should all know more within the next few weeks.

I think the slimmer necks came along with the single truss rod design.

Can someone please send me their 4005V so I can personally verify this.

cheyenne wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 5:30 pm I think the slimmer necks came along with the single truss rod design.

Yes. I just spent a few days with a friend's satin autumnglo 4003CB and it has a thick baseball bat neck with a single truss rod.

Yet another friend has a newer 4003S with a more slender profile, though I wouldn't call it skinny, as in 1960s skinny. It reminded me somewhat of the profile on my '80 4000.

jps wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 7:28 pm Can someone please send me their 4005V so I can personally verify this.

And send it to me next!

jps wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 7:28 pm Can someone please send me their 4005V so I can personally verify this.

Sorry, Jeff...gotta gig this weekend. But I'll be thinking of you as I wrap my hand around that uber-shallow neck on that wide bodied tone machine!

Chris

nixdad wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 1:31 am

jps wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 7:28 pm Can someone please send me their 4005V so I can personally verify this.

Sorry, Jeff...gotta gig this weekend. But I'll be thinking of you as I wrap my hand around that uber-shallow neck on that wide bodied tone machine!

Chris

Careful how you say that!!!

I'm just curious if it's as shallow as the one on my old WB.

bassdroid wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:24 pm

cheyenne wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 5:30 pm I think the slimmer necks came along with the single truss rod design.

Yes. I just spent a few days with a friend's satin autumnglo 4003CB and it has a thick baseball bat neck with a single truss rod.

Yet another friend has a newer 4003S with a more slender profile, though I wouldn't call it skinny, as in 1960s skinny. It reminded me somewhat of the profile on my '80 4000.

It’s funny, I’ve played a couple of ‘60s Rics, an RM1999 and a ‘68, expecting the necks to be like pencils, and I wouldn’t have said either of the necks was spectacularly skinny. They were not dissimilar to my ‘72s, kind of wide and flat, but if anything slightly chunkier. I’d say my ‘91 CS possibly had a slimmer neck. And my ‘71 21 fretter probably had the slimmest neck of the basses I’ve owned. I can’t help wondering if the ‘60s basses I played were atypical. I still haven’t played a recent 4003 though.

henry5 wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:28 pmYes. I just spent a few days with a friend's satin autumnglo 4003CB and it has a thick baseball bat neck with a single truss rod.

Yet another friend has a newer 4003S with a more slender profile, though I wouldn't call it skinny, as in 1960s skinny. It reminded me somewhat of the profile on my '80 4000.

It’s funny, I’ve played a couple of ‘60s Rics, an RM1999 and a ‘68, expecting the necks to be like pencils, and I wouldn’t have said either of the necks was spectacularly skinny. They were not dissimilar to my ‘72s, kind of wide and flat, but if anything slightly chunkier. I’d say my ‘91 CS possibly had a slimmer neck. And my ‘71 21 fretter probably had the slimmest neck of the basses I’ve owned. I can’t help wondering if the ‘60s basses I played were atypical. I still haven’t played a recent 4003 though.[/quote]

Seems like you either have to know someone who has one or buy one yourself in order to try one.

henry5 wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:28 pm It’s funny, I’ve played a couple of ‘60s Rics, an RM1999 and a ‘68, expecting the necks to be like pencils, and I wouldn’t have said either of the necks was spectacularly skinny. They were not dissimilar to my ‘72s, kind of wide and flat, but if anything slightly chunkier. I’d say my ‘91 CS possibly had a slimmer neck. And my ‘71 21 fretter probably had the slimmest neck of the basses I’ve owned. I can’t help wondering if the ‘60s basses I played were atypical. I still haven’t played a recent 4003 though.

It seems some variation could be possible in the pre CNC era.

Certainly there is the danger of semantics, but though I wouldn't call the neck on my 66 pencil thin it is definitely in the thin end of the spectrum, and thinner than any Ric basses I've ecountered recently: a range of them from 1973 to 2023.

The neck on my 66 measures .84 deep at both the first and 12th frets. The neck width is 1.7 at the nut and 2.24 where it joins the body.

The 2022 4003CB is .925 deep, nut width is 1.73, and width at the body is 2.31.

A significant difference in depth if not width.

When I think of a pencil-thin neck I think of a Fender Performer I once tried to play. The neck was uncomfortably thin...it practically disappeared in my hand.

A lot of people refer to a ‘thin’ neck as Fender Jazz-like, but to me that’s only thin at the nut, and not what I call thin at all (Especially given I don’t spend much time near the nut ). A thin neck to me is narrow all the way along and thin front to back.

henry5 wrote: Mon Jan 20, 2025 12:53 pm A lot of people refer to a ‘thin’ neck as Fender Jazz-like, but to me that’s only thin at the nut, and not what I call thin at all (Especially given I don’t spend much time near the nut ). A thin neck to me is narrow all the way along and thin front to back.

"Shallow" is probably a better term. As stated, the necks on the new 4005V's are very shallow (from to back) and reminiscent of the 60's 4005 necks. Very comfortable to play.

"Shallow" would work well.

Me, I've always used thick and thin for that, and narrow and wide for, well, the width of the fretboard.

I had a Fender Jazz, way back when. I found the neck both too narrow and too thick for my taste down near the nut, which is mostly where I played back then. Similarly, I found Precision necks to also be too thick. As such, I never became a Fender fan.

As for my Rics, I'm comfortable with most of them. They fall within a fairly narrow range. My 86 MB 4003 feels a bit narrow to me, and my 2005 4004Cii just feels thick. Not my favorite basses.