Ric 4003 Neck - What Years for Slim/Smaller Size ?

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by Wolfpack, Dec 17, 2012.


  1. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    I'm referring to thickness/shape near the nut/frets 1-3.
    The only info I can find came from the Ric forum saying 06-08's were smaller.
    Any one here have better or more info ?

    Thanks
     
  2. RickenBoogie

    RickenBoogie

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    1970's 4001's, then hit or miss until late ;06 through '08 is a good baseline.
     
  3. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    the 60s 4001 necks are flat and wide and skinny ... The skinny is front to back. These necks are so skinny that some of them failed. My old 1968 4001 had the skinniest neck I ever play on a Rick. The fattest was an early 80s 4003.

    Rickenbacker is notorious for producing thin and chunky necks on the 4003 basses.
     
  4. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    The nicest 4003 necks that I have seen are the new 2 piece 4003 necks from 2009, 2010, and 2011.
     
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    It's frustrating trying to find any definitive info.
    Seems even within the same year their neck sizes can vary widely.
     
  7. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Does nicest = smaller size ?
    I'm pretty sure I've tried an 09 & it was thick thick thick
     
  8. Kopfjaeger

    Kopfjaeger Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    +1. I have a 2011 built 4003. Fits the bill you are looking for. Nice shallow D profile.

    Sepp
     
  9. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    There were some years where they produced chunky and slim necks at the same time. I think there were some years they programmed 2 different profiles into the NC machine. I know when they produced the C64 basses they had slimmer neck and I think some of the slimmer C64 necks got put on regular 4003 basses.

    The 4004 necks were different than the 4003 necks in that they got wider at the fretboard by about 1/8" or maybe even 1/4".

    The 2030 basses had a bolt on neck that was a lot like a jazz bass in profile. They were very slim at the nut. (About 1 1/2" accross the fretboard)
     
  10. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado

    Nice = slim ...

    I had a 2009, 2 2010, and a 2011 bass in my workshop and all 4 had nice slim necks.

    But remember a Rickenbacker 4003 neck does not taper the way a Fender neck does. The fretboard width on a Fender taperes a lot from the body to the nut. Rickenbacker neacks have a narrower fretboard at the body and a wider fretboard at the nut and therefore tapers less than a Fender neck.

    People who always play below the 7th fret don't usually like Rick necks. But players who use the whole neck love the slim feel of Rick necks around the 12th fret.
     
  11. electracoyote

    electracoyote

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    Purple Mountain Majesties
    I currently own two white Ric 4003's, one is from June 1993, the other from October 1985. Both have a comfortable "shallow D" slim profile. Not ultra-flat, but slimmer than a typical P Bass.

    I just sold a Turquoise 4003 made June 2002, it had a chunkier neck profile. I didn't mind it so much, neck profiles aren't a big deterrent for me, I just needed some cash and decided two Rics were enough for now.
     
  12. Lazarus.Bird

    Lazarus.Bird Mr. Personality

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Briefly owned a 2001, it was pretty thick.

    My main is an '85 and it is super thin.
     
  13. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    With Ricks C means fatter and D is the slimmer.

    The letter C is fatter front to back than the letter D.
     
  14. electracoyote

    electracoyote

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    Purple Mountain Majesties
    Okay, I edited my post.
     
  15. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    So when Wildwood told me their new 2012's had a D profile, this means slimmer ?
    :eyebrow:
     
  16. kcole4001

    kcole4001

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    It's really more of a flattened D if it's anything like the 2010 basses.
    The neck is a little wider than the older (pre CNC cut?) necks, but still pretty thin front to back.
     
  17. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    I've seen the recent nut width spec as 1 & 11/16"
    Is that wider than the older ones you're referring to ?
     
  18. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    Unfortunately not everone uses this term the same ... but yes it probably means thinner ...
     
  19. Ric5

    Ric5 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Colorado
    The nut width has remained fairly constant through the years. But the girth and the fatness front to back has varied through the years. The 70s 4001 basses were maybe 1/32" or less narrower at the nut (I never took a measurement)

    You can buy a new nut from Rickenbacker and install it on pretty much any 4000 series bass and the only mod that will be needed is a height adjustment.

    I put a modern 4003 nut on my 1968 4001 and it worked fine. The old one had been replaced with a brass nut and I was trying to make it more stock.
     
  20. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Ugh, great, I passed up buying one of their new Ruby Red's because I could not get a definitive answer from them of what to expect.
     
  21. kcole4001

    kcole4001

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Here are my measurements using digital caliper:
    ------------AT NUT-------AT BODY
    1976 4000: 1.680".............2.247"
    1977 4001: 1.680".............2.290"
    2010 4003: 1.707".............2.330"

    Not quite as much difference as I expected.
    Obviously the profile accentuates the slight width difference.
     

Share This Page