Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Tales of exploding R tailpieces catalyzed me to buy an extra off Reverb, just in case.

This is described as circa early 2000s off a 620. However, the casting is quite rough compared to the factory piece on my ‘99 360. I’m questioning if it’s genuine or not. Any insight is appreciated.

IMO (and I'm no metallurgist), that casting does look suspect.

I will take a picture of my three broken 12-string tailpieces later today and post it for further comparison.

Here are the pictures of my 12-string tailpieces.
Based on the additional examples, I would conclude that the one you bought does look like a DIY knock-off.

I have seen genuine originals which were much worse than the one you posted. I got this one from the Ric factory and returned it for a replacement which was somewhat better, but still not great.

doctorwho wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 2:47 am Here are the pictures of my 12-string tailpieces.

DSCN4159_crpd.jpg
DSCN4151_crpd.jpg

Based on the additional examples, I would conclude that the one you bought does look like a DIY knock-off.

Well, that’s disconcerting. Thanks for the info and the comparison photos.

teb wrote: Thu Jul 10, 2025 9:24 pm I have seen genuine originals which were much worse than the one you posted. I got this one from the Ric factory and returned it for a replacement which was somewhat better, but still not great.

Thanks. Yeah, it’s surprising a factory piece would look like that. Is there any way to definitely tell a genuine one?

Well, speaking as a chemist, I would conjecture that, even though they are chrome-plated, an XRF (X-ray fluorescence) spectrometric analysis (non-destructive) would probably show what the metal composition was in them beyond the plating. But then again, there may be year/era differences in the composition. Sounds like a thesis project!

Bottom line is if it works O.K., I wouldn't sweat the appearance.

I was never a chemist, but I was a sculpture major in college and did some lost wax metal casting. The original is made from wax and the quality of the back side is whatever level you finish it to. There really is no excuse for the poor quality shown on some of these. The wax piece is then encased in a plaster mixture called investment, allowed to completely harden and dry, then heated in a kiln where the wax is burned out leaving a hole the exact shape of the original wax piece. A small sprue which was added to the wax piece before investing joins the cavity inside the investment to the outside world. The molten metal is then poured into the cavity through that hole and some shapes need other small sprues which act as air vents to allow the mold to fill completely. Once cooled, the investment is broken off, sprues are cut off and the piece gets any other cleanup. Then it gets plated in the case of something like this. If this sounds like a lot of rather tedious work, that's because it is. At the price that R tailpieces sell for, making small quantities of fake ones wouldn't make a whole lot of sense or profit.

Well, my 66 330 12 just joined the club.

Welcome to the RRF, Jimmy. Sorry to hear about your tailpiece "explosion". There are several interesting theories presented here in an attempt to explain the fragility of this tailpiece. It is especially tragic as this tailpiece is so iconic and immediately associated with Rickenbacker. I swapped one of mine out some time ago to avoid this outcome. Perhaps the Factory has thoughts on the R tailpiece. I confess that I miss it on my 350 Liverpool.

Happy to be here!

A few of us have experienced your pain.

If you go down the path of getting a replacement tailpiece from RIC also replace the tailpiece bracket. It's the same material, the same age, and only a little bit more solid. After replacing my R tailpiece the bracket blew out about 18 months later.

Cheers,
Andrew

Thanks,
If I can find a replacement, just going to put it away. Ordered a Winfield trapeze for all my R guitars. Hopefully, one day I will find one.