Rutherfaker

[gearHed289]

Actually, a much better attempt than this one, where two Ric's died, although this guy got the horn near right, WTF happened to the meeting of bodies .

www.yourmovetheband.com/rick.php

I've seen that one. Don't really care for the "rear end". When I win the lotto, I'm going to join a 480 guitar (top) to a 4003S bass. 

[Dave W]

Actually, a much better attempt than this one, where two Ric's died, although this guy got the horn near right, WTF happened to the meeting of bodies .

www.yourmovetheband.com/rick.php

No doubt he wanted the area between the upper horns to be continuous. The overall effect just doesn't look right to me, though.

[SeanS]

No doubt he wanted the area between the upper horns to be continuous. The overall effect just doesn't look right to me, though.

I meant the lower edge, looks like two guitars glued together, not sure how the real RUTH was done in this respect though, the bridge on the bass looks pretty much where it should be, so extra body on the 12 string I suppose.

[Psycho Bass Guy]

I meant the lower edge, looks like two guitars glued together, not sure how the real RUTH was done in this respect though, the bridge on the bass looks pretty much where it should be, so extra body on the 12 string I suppose.

I get the feeling the rears were not aligned to make transitioning between the necks easier. The guitar is set farther foward in a more natural playing position in regards to the fretting hand.

[Dave W]

I meant the lower edge, looks like two guitars glued together, not sure how the real RUTH was done in this respect though, the bridge on the bass looks pretty much where it should be, so extra body on the 12 string I suppose.

That's what I meant about it not looking right. He made the upper transition smooth but the lower transition looks awkward.

I get the feeling the rears were not aligned to make transitioning between the necks easier. The guitar is set farther foward in a more natural playing position in regards to the fretting hand.

That makes sense.

[SeanS]

I get the feeling the rears were not aligned to make transitioning between the necks easier. The guitar is set farther foward in a more natural playing position in regards to the fretting hand.

It does make sense, but it's not like the real one which has no mating lines or curves.

[Hörnisse]

It does make sense, but it's not like the real one which has no mating lines or curves.

Plus, the real ones have bolt on necks.

[ilan]

Plus, the real ones have bolt on necks.

I could never understand why they were designed like that. Maybe because the two necks are at different angle (tilt) to the body - but why?

The first 4080's had the bass neck not deep enough into the body (like the Burg in the pic), which was unstable and prone to trouble. So RIC changed the body shape around the cutaway, so that the necks have deeper pockets. They had to compromise looks (and upper fret access) for function. They also glued the necks inside the pockets.

[uwe]

Real Ric doublenecks were bolt-on? 

How you guys shatter illusions here. 

[Paul Boyer]

Real Ric doublenecks were bolt-on? 

How you guys shatter illusions here. 

Illusion, indeed. Actually, the double-neckers are "screwed and glued." But the 4080 is not the only Rick bass to have something other than a neck-through assembly. 4000 and 4001S basses from mid-1972 to the end of production in the early 1980s were set-neck construction. The hollow-body 4005 bass family also had set necks.

The lower-priced 3001 (and the short-scale 3000) were "bolt-on" necks (wood screws, actually), as were all the basses in the 2000 series: 2020, 2030, 2050, 2060, and 2030 Glenn Frey signature edition.

Neck-through Rick basses include early 4000 and 4001S, deluxe 4001, 4002, 4003, 4004, and 4008 and all their subvariants.

[SeanS]

Plus, the real ones have bolt on necks.

I was referring to the real Rutherford.