Rickenbacker 4003 body differences

[D Bopp]

I'm sure there has been posts about this before, but I have two 4003's in my possession, and had them both out tonight. I snapped a few pics to show the differences in body styles.
The one with the stickers on the pickguard is a brand new 2013. The other one is from 1990.

You can see the newer model has skinnier upper horns. Also, the top horn on the 2013 is a little shorter than the 1990.

The headstocks are a bit different as well.

The neck on the 1990 is thinner than the new one. The new one is a bit chunky and in a way feels flat on the backside, almost like a 2x4 with rounded off edges. That may be a bit extreme, but it's the best way I can describe it.

Enjoy the pics!

 

[Baird6869]

Cool. I thought they were all the same except the neck profile.

 

[bobalu]

That's quite a big difference in body size. I did not know that. Very cool.

 

[Dave W]

Yeah, the 1990 body looks gigantic in comparison.

 

[Baird6869]

A whole fret difference where the necks meet the bodies too.

If someone told me one was fake, I would guess the one on the left.... Obviously not the case thought.

 

[ScottTunes]

That's quite a big difference in body size. I did not know that. Very cool.

Boy! No kidding!!! I'll bet it's the "same difference" throughout the decades too!

There's quite a difference between my '86 4003S and my '95 v63. And I don't want to part with either!

 

[Mastermold]

Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I didn't know the bodies changed that much.

 

[Ric5]

Rickenbacker bodies have changed through the years ... In the 50s each bass was like a one off creation. In the 60s through 1972 the basses had the calssic shape we know. The necks were really thin ... and many failed. !973 to early 80s the 4001 got a fatter neck and smaller headstock. In 1980 the 4003 was born. On the outside they looked a lot like the 4001 from the 70s. In 1990 the bodt shape changed a little again. In 1997 the 4003 got went back to a body and headstock shape that is more like the 60s 4001 basses. This shape continues to today.

 

[rickster4003]

Nice pictures-interesting. You can also see the inlay differences. But the bodies are very distinctly different when next to each other.

 

[IronLung1986]

the newer ones are a lot better looking i think. the curves and proportions are more appealing. it's a more refined look overall.

 

[Ric5]

Bit by Bit New Ricks are looking more like the old 60s 4001 basses. The body shape has returned to the 60s. The headstock shape and the walnut headwings are more like the 60s. They have gone back to full width inlays. You can get toaster and horshoe pickups. You can get the plastic tug bar, you can get the 60s shape pickguard. Pretty much the only thing missing is the Checkered binding.

One major difference is the 4003 neck is strong and the fretboard won't pop off if the rods are improperly adjusted.

Here's some pics of my 1968 4001.

 

[D Bopp]

I'm torn between the body styles. But I favor the 1990 head stock a little more.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

I wasn't a big fan of the larger horns when they first appeared, but I'm even less of a fan of the newer thin horns. Coupled with the full width inlays it appears ill-proportioned. If they become any thinner, they will be pointy! For me, the sweet spot is in between those two illustrated sizes.

 

[lowendblues]

The older one shows how worn the original templates had become.

 

[mellowinman]

My Ric is perfect, and if anyone says otherwise, I will disagree vehemently.

 

[Ric5]

I have a 1990 4003s5 that I repaired / restored ... it has those fat wings they were doing in 1990 ...

 

[CrunchyFrog]

Doh! I posted to the wrong thread. There's a brand new thread about this stuff and this thread was linked to from there.

Anyway, I have a 1987 V63 with the larger horns. Darn near bought another V63 years later just to have one with normal horns but never got around to it.

 

[Axstar]

I quite like the big fat horns (ha!) on the older bass. If anything I think the new horns look too thin and a bit dainty (ha!).

It looks, to my ignorant eyes, that the bass-side horn on the new basses are thinner even than they were on late '60s basses?

 

[the mojo hobo]

Doh! I posted to the wrong thread. There's a brand new thread about this stuff and this thread was linked to from there.

Anyway, I have a 1987 V63 with the larger horns. Darn near bought another V63 years later just to have one with normal horns but never got around to it.

My Oct 1988 V63 has thinner horns and a beautiful dark Fireglo.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

It looks, to my ignorant eyes, that the bass-side horn on the new basses are thinner even than they were on late '60s basses?

I think so too and it was a surprise to me to hear that the thinner horns were supposed to be more like those from the 1960s.

My Oct 1988 V63 has thinner horns and a beautiful dark Fireglo.

Yes, I have the dark fireglo too and I love it.

Regarding the thicker horns on my bass, I have read of another owner of an 87-88 V63 also having thicker horns. I guess there wasn't much thought exercised at the factory at that time as my bass - remember it's supposed to be replica of a vintage bass - also has the extra tailpiece screws in addition to the notch. Go figure.