CME Rickenbacker 4005CX!

[eldoryder]

Has anyone seen these yet? I'm stunned and amazed. I thought that Rickenbacker's contention (or at least John Hall's) was that these were poor sellers, and they weren't going to bother ever bringing them back? I wonder if all the Chickenbacker 4005s out there made them change their mind?

Rickenbacker 90th Anniversary 4005XC Amber FireGlo

Rickenbacker 90th Anniversary 4005XC JetGlo

Just one quibble. It might be a self-fulfilling prophesy for them, however. By making them "Anniversary Models" with a street price of $5149.00, they may not be big sellers. Then they can say "they tried, but weren't selling well", and be done with it for good.

I would have really considered one at the street price of a 4003. Just sayin'.

Time will tell, I guess.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

Its a gorgeous bass and priced for the collector market, not the average player. Like the real 4005, I never expect to see one for sale in a store, ever, anywhere. The videos I've seen of 4005 being played convinced me the tone is not worth the price to me, but it will be for somebody. A few well-heeled players will get them and the rest will disappear into vaults and locked closets as investment basses. I particularly love the "gliter" inlays, having tried my hand at some, i know how difficult that is to pull off. The only disappointment is the cheap looking tailpiece, it looks.out of place on a bass this expensive. Im sure they still have, or could re-create the mold for the cool old "R" tailpieces.

 

[Sid the Kid]

I am willing to wager that they will sell every single one they make. Never underestimate the bank accounts of collectors.

 

[PWRL]

I think they're neat. A few years ago, I'd have probably been on board, but my time for expensive basses is over. They'll all sell just fine, though.

 

[Mr.Fingers]

I'd rather have that they went for the proper 4005, instead of this 360OS-style.

 

[Kendescending]

I was seriously thinking about ordering one, but it's not what I like in a bass other than the shape. It's a 30.5" scale with toaster pickups right at the bridge and neck and nothing in the "sweet spot".

I really wish they would have done it like the one I had made for me years ago.

 

[StatesideRambler]

I played a borrowed, original 4005 in the late 60s for a week and I've never forgotten how much I enjoyed it. Even if I hit a lotto today and could afford to buy a mint condition original 4005 from a collector's estate I wouldn't because it needs to be played, not merely owned.

 

[dalkowski]

I'd rather have that they went for the proper 4005, instead of this 360OS-style.

This x 1,000. I'm not feeling this new model.
Nor am I feeling >$5K flush so it's moot.

 

[BoomFish]

I prefer short scales. However this looks like a regular sized 4005 (except with pointed horns) with the bridge moved towards the neck making it 30.5" scale.

if that's the case, then the bass would be longer than I'm tall. That's why I prefer shorts scales. Not because I can't play 34"scale basses, but because i think I look funny standing next to a bass thats taller than me.

Ok im exaggerated a bit. Im 5'6 (66") and most regular scale basses are like 46" - 48" but when looking at this picture of 1968 Rickenbacker 4000, 4001, and 4005 basses the 4005 has a huge body

 

[ardgedee]

Has anyone seen these yet? I'm stunned and amazed. I thought that Rickenbacker's contention (or at least John Hall's) was that these were poor sellers, and they weren't going to bother ever bringing them back? I wonder if all the Chickenbacker 4005s out there made them change their mind?

I imagine it went something like this:

Rickenbacker: "We're never making the 4005 again."
CME: "If you make a limited run we'll buy the whole set. here's a down payment."
Rickenbacker: "The 4005 is back!"

 

[Jeff Scott]

...this looks like a regular sized 4005 (except with pointed horns) with the bridge moved towards the neck making it 30.5" scale.

That's not what they are like, at all. It is a 330 body with a SS bass neck on it. The location of the tailpiece (trapeze, in this case), bridge, pickups, pickguard, controls, etc. are exactly that of a 330 with added CB purfling/binding.

 

[Pauly 4001]

Time for me to trot out my trusty Shaftesbury and flaunt it at you all. It's Rose Morris made so is at least as close to a proper 4005 as this new release is.

 

[Anachronism]

There's been discussion of these on the Rick club and elsewhere. It's an anniversary model (there is also a 480 guitar reissue) and RIC has taken orders for about 500 (original plan was for fewer, but money talks). If Wildwood has any preorder slots left their prices are the best I've seen, $4100.

 

[BoomFish]

That's not what they are like, at all. It is a 330 body with a SS bass neck on it. The location of the tailpiece (trapeze, in this case), bridge, pickups, pickguard, controls, etc. are exactly that of a 330 with added CB purfling/binding.

thank you for the clarification. A 330 body I can do.

 

[Jeff Scott]

My old March '67 330.

 

[fakeneckplate'65]

Damn, it says they're not supposed to ship until February 2022.

 

[Jeff Scott]

Damn, it says they're not supposed to ship until February 2022.

This is deliberate so that it won't detract from the 2021 F1 season.

 

[Fender_Bender]

That tailpiece looks like something a 12 year old Chinese kid had to hack out of a tin can .

 

[roswell1965]

That tailpiece looks like something a 12 year old Chinese kid had to hack out of a tin can .

LOL! It does look like pure junk. And priced north of 5K on top of it.

 

[captainofsmooth]

I'd easily have bought this at a reasonable Ric price. So as OP stated, when they "don't sell well," there's the reason.