Page 1 of 2
Rickenbacker Crazing...?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:09 am
by 21frets
I read this off the Rickenbacker site
"Following many coats of sealer and color coats, numerous applications of a super high gloss finish are made. Providing not only great visual appeal, this surface treatment protects the guitar from dings and scrapes; the unique chemistry of the material makes it both hard and flexible at the same time. Impact areas do not craze or radiate like polyester, nor does this material turn cloudy or finish-check in cool weather like nitrocellulose."
However what would cause this to happen, this is a Ric that is on Ebay ...

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:14 am
by jingle_jangle
I believe that this is thermal-shock related.
All finishes get brittle with time.
Combine the brittleness of an older finish with many temperature changes and this is a typical result.
And although RIC has used "conversion varnish" since 1958, You can be sure that the formula of this stuff has changed for the better, as finish chemistry has improved. I'm sure one of the features of newer versions is improved flexibility over time.
That's not to say that even new Ricks are totally immune to finish checking. Beware of sudden huge temperature differences. Don't subject your guitar to them and you won't have to see this happen.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:27 am
by squid
I'm sure it looks worse in person, but as it appears in the photo, that crazing's not so bad. It almost vanishes into the woodgrain.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:33 am
by 21frets
This 360 is not very old - late 90's. That finish must have went though some very extreme climate changes and who knows what the glue joints are like now...
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:48 am
by jingle_jangle
Unless the guitar has been immersed on water or the sealer somehow compromised to let lots of moisture into the glue joints, I'd say that they wouldn't be too worrisome. But, yes, Larry, all these things still should be considered when a clue like this comes up in the inspection of the guitar.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:02 am
by adam_swapp
Paul Wilczynski sez: "Unless the guitar has been immersed on water..."
I keep telling folks to take the strings off the guitar before they boil them.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:20 am
by bmi_guy
I think Adam is on to something here - we'd better pay attention.

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:32 am
by bmi_guy
If this guitar was 30 years old, one could expect something like that to occur. (Although I've seen some guitars older than that that had a good finish - no cracking. I agree with Larry.
Was it stored in a garage or something for a time?
Sure is a shame to see that on such a fine instrument.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:11 am
by jingle_jangle
Exactly my point--extreme changes in temp and humidity are not good for any instrument.
Example:
I kept an old (1950s), nitro Fender in its case in the closet of my apartment in Brasil, 1/4 mile from the Atlantic Ocean, and 18 floors up, for about a year and a half.
The guitar was near mint when placed in the closet. The humidity there approaches 95% most days, and temp is a fairly constant 80 degrees F. There is some salt in the air all the time.
My last visit, I pulled the guitar out to play it. To Fender's credit, the string saddles and plated stamped parts were fine, with only minor pitting. The maple neck held up OK, too. The frets were green. The strings were completely corroded and the three non-wound were broken at the bridge saddles. The tuning keys were completely rusted. The die cast barrel knobs were swollen and oxidized and the chrome had peeled off in large sections.
But the paint! As I removed the guitar from its case (which had mold growing in it) The paint on the back of the guitar came free in one thin sheet. It didn't stick to the case lining, but just sat there.
This is the most severe case of environmental reaction I've ever seen It was NOT due to temperature variation--it was humidity and caustic atmosphere, creating a "relic" that nobody would want. Evil mojo.
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:01 am
by adam_swapp
Paul Wilczynski sez: "a "relic" that nobody would want"
I would.

Still have it? Want to sell it?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:10 am
by jingle_jangle
It's Wilczynski, Adam! It's on the left-hand margin of my post there... no offense, I know it's a tough one to spell.
It's been professionally restored (by me) to a gnat's a**, making it worthless. But it plays and sounds and looks beautiful. I posted pics of it a month or so back in another thread.
Thanks for askin'
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:31 am
by adam_swapp
Paul Wilczynski corrects me thusly: "It's Wilczynski, Adam! It's on the left-hand margin of my post there... no offense, I know it's a tough one to spell."
Better now?

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:01 am
by johnhall
This guitar spent the night in someone's trunk in winter and then the case was popped open in a warm place. The formula we use now, as opposed to the one in the early 90's, would probably not do this but who would want to risk it with any guitar?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:25 am
by jingle_jangle
Amen to that!
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:26 am
by jingle_jangle
Adam: HUH?