Announcement

**Gaspare** · 05-16-2019, 09:11 AM

Thank you so much..

- show these photos to someone who has their masters in metallurgy or a jewelry manufacturer in business a min of 20 yrs.. Ask them, is this cast or not.. You will get the same answer... There are differences from the early to later pattern,,,maybe even differences in the early pattern by itself...

**Antonio Scapini** · 05-16-2019, 10:48 AM

Gaspare, you are a friend.
But I have to say it is years you write "ask to this...", "ask to that...".
And at the end of the story it is always the same: words, words, words and NOTHING interesting. Only opinions that create only confusion (exactly like the confusion we got since decades...).

You ask to a jeweller that says "die struck", your friend to another that says "cast", a third says made with "Cad-Cam" and a fourth says "made on the moon by aliens".
I asked many, and always got the same reply: "cast". Also from the most ancient jeweller and engraver I went to make copies. But "ask" worths NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

There are scientifical data available. ALL THOSE want can test by themself exactly what I did. It is not a secret (and I repeat: IT IS NOT MY OPINION, I'm only posting evidences, and asking for evidences).

If you want to ignore the data it is ok, but you know VERY WELL that each single evidence of all those I posted (and they are not all!) is TOTALLY uncompatible with the die struck production. And there's NO ONE single proof supporting this theory. Only the well known blah blah.

Rings tested were 30 and 40 style, so please, don't create new stories, we have heard so much of them in the past and we no need new ones.
There were several different patterns? YES, you are right! At least 6 different types of '30 style rings for example. And this is uncompatible too with the die struck fantasy theory.

Since now on I would like to see discussion on real evicences, not the usual blah blah blah. Collectors are tired of blah blah, old myths and stories...

Just my 2 cents.

**Gaspare** · 05-16-2019, 12:10 PM

First I don't participate in blah blah conversations. Didn't on GDC and won't here..

I ask questions,, yes,
- About that smooth HR,,,, because these guys want to be freakin spoon fed everything! 'I have 20 HR IF I send you money can they be 'papered'?' 'IF I buy this book will I be able to authenticate my own HR.' etc. etc.

Cast.. Molten silver poured in to a mold, or injected.. A small cast silver piece like Robins ring,,, IF you put it thru a roller [not advisable] there would be a problem because its cast.
So used out of the mold, even if cast semi round - ,simple question what would you see if the ring got as worn as Robins?

have a good time guys.......

**FrenchVolunteer** · 05-16-2019, 01:50 PM

Hi,

i'm totally a noob on the TK rings, and if the rings are indeed casted, i have four questions for you Antonio.
Those are not ironical questions, bu practical and visual ones.

1) why is there a vertical "soldering" mark (the "black" line) in the back of the Totenkopf of the rings ?

2) if the rings are casted, does it imply that, during all the life of each identified variation/type, a few sizes of molds existed to match the various finger sizes ?
Maybe you can explain how do you think the rings were made when an order was sent to Gahr.

3) if the rings are casted, is there still a way to identify original rings (and their variations) to the various generations of fakes ?

4) what i like to do is to identify generations/families of fakes over the years.
Where you able to start to identify a few ones, with distinctive patterns ?

Many thanks again for your hard work with Jo.

See You

Vince

**Gaspare** · 05-16-2019, 02:02 PM

Antonio brother I'm starting to get cranky in my old[?] age.. Love you man..

There are too many topics but all interesting.. From the other topic:

'My experience with extreme magnification. Took a PP ring, the die it was made from and brought it to a Super Collider place [top secret stuff, really!]
Asked this scientist about what I wanted to prove beyond a shadow of doubt. He laughed and said "I'm actually busy,,leave it all, interesting",come back next month".. 2 months later,, I go back to hear him explain to me ,,,this pressed ring from this die,,once rounded,,then dam man he started,,,crystalline nature of this,,opposing forces that, stress, dimensions, etc etc. - End result the ring was pressed from bullion,then made into rolled billet,,put in a press with the die chocked up in it, press a button ring made. take out, rounded, soldered done,,end of story. again, nothing that pertains to the HR,,just my experience with extreme magnification.'

PP rings are usually die pressed. Yes, the HR isn't a PP ring,,just a bit about my extreme Mag experience..

**Gaspare** · 05-16-2019, 02:19 PM

Hi Vince,, I'm sure others will join in here too..

1,, yes a solder joint to attach skull and band together
2,,good question! partial answer, with as little waste as possible thats for sure.
3,,1st pattern you'll see will be easier to identify
4,, dam man thats probably years worth of work!

during the 3rd reich,,there was not the combinations of centrifugal , injected , vacuum assisted casting we have post war.

A casting was imperfect inside and out during the 3rd reich... whats missing when we look at Robins worn ring....
IF you took a 50s/60s cast ring and engraved it,,good chance the bit could hit a internal micro bubble, a fault etc. And the more you polished it [ inside and outer ] the more you could expose these type things..

**Antonio Scapini** · 05-17-2019, 05:32 AM

Originally posted by FrenchVolunteer View Post

Hi,

i'm totally a noob on the TK rings, and if the rings are indeed casted, i have four questions for you Antonio.
Those are not ironical questions, bu practical and visual ones.

1) why is there a vertical "soldering" mark (the "black" line) in the back of the Totenkopf of the rings ?

2) if the rings are casted, does it imply that, during all the life of each identified variation/type, a few sizes of molds existed to match the various finger sizes ?
Maybe you can explain how do you think the rings were made when an order was sent to Gahr.

3) if the rings are casted, is there still a way to identify original rings (and their variations) to the various generations of fakes ?

4) what i like to do is to identify generations/families of fakes over the years.
Where you able to start to identify a few ones, with distinctive patterns ?

Many thanks again for your hard work with Jo.

See You

Vince

Vince, Gaspare already replied and I agree for most.

2) exist different patterns, but all them were made on the same ring body, so you no need much work, you can simply made multiple rings from the same ring body used as base.

3) Yes, fake rings are NOT made of multiple parts (or at least not until today!). If you put togheter all the details of TK ring construction, you can easily spot the fakes (multiple parts, hand finish with tool, ...).

4) I think it is an impossible work to do. But I know for sure you can do almost perfect fakes without spending thousands of $.

Originally posted by Gaspare View Post

A casting was imperfect inside and out during the 3rd reich... whats missing when we look at Robins worn ring....
IF you took a 50s/60s cast ring and engraved it,,good chance the bit could hit a internal micro bubble, a fault etc. And the more you polished it [ inside and outer ] the more you could expose these type things..

This is one of the most wrong statements I've ever read, I'm astonished to read this from you my friend!
Almost all the jewelry cast produced items are without the imperfections you are mentioning here.
This is only a myth, without any foundation. Even the most common lost wax pieces don't show what you say. I will show you the first attempt (simply poured silver in a mold) of my fake rings worn out and you'll notice no bubbles or imperfections.
And the cast items cover the most part of the jewelry production today, as in the past, I found a data in a U. research that reported something like 90-95% (Third Reich PP production was less than 0, % of the TR jewelry production). Die struck jewelry is only 5-10%.
Anyway exist TK rings that show exactly what you wrote here: air bubbles (and this is of course a good sign of casting!). See attached pictures.

PP rings are another chapter, there are 2 reasons why they were most die struck, and both them CONFIRM the BIG difference between TK and PP rings:
1) you can save metal making thinner rings
2) die-struck jewelry items are more resistant to friction, abrasion and corrosion - Even if you wear die-struck rings every day for years, they will show fewer signs of wear and tear than a cast ring would (one example? The TK rings produced by Hapur! Wear them for years and they will remain almost intact - Wear a TK ring for years, and you'll get exactly a totally worn out one!).

Everything perfectly led us in one direction only. Exactly as the lab and metal tests.

Attached Files

**Gaspare** · 05-17-2019, 05:49 AM

ok, lets start with what we agree on.. PP rings die pressed... HRs multiple piece..

"2) exist different patterns, but all them were made on the same ring body, so you no need much work, you can simply made multiple rings from the same ring body used as base.

3) Yes, fake rings are NOT made of multiple parts (or at least not until today!). If you put togheter all the details of TK ring construction, you can easily spot the fakes (multiple parts, hand finish with tool, ...).

4) I think it is an impossible work to do. But I know for sure you can do almost perfect fakes without spending thousands of $."

- *I'd like the see some 3rd reich jewelry [not a ring] that was cast shown, especially the back or a worn piece.

**Jeff V** · 05-17-2019, 09:26 AM

"die-struck jewelry items are more resistant to friction, abrasion and corrosion - Even if you wear die-struck rings every day for years, they will show fewer signs of wear and tear than a cast ring would (one example? The TK rings produced by Hapur! Wear them for years and they will remain almost intact - Wear a TK ring for years, and you'll get exactly a totally worn out one!"

Makes sense Antonio. I always wondered why my Hapur ring never showed any wear no matter how much I wore it. The die forming process that Hapur uses must impart a hardness to the silver, compared to the soft cast original rings.

**Ric Ferrari** · 05-17-2019, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by Jeff V View Post

"die-struck jewelry items are more resistant to friction, abrasion and corrosion - Even if you wear die-struck rings every day for years, they will show fewer signs of wear and tear than a cast ring would (one example? The TK rings produced by Hapur! Wear them for years and they will remain almost intact - Wear a TK ring for years, and you'll get exactly a totally worn out one!"

Makes sense Antonio. I always wondered why my Hapur ring never showed any wear no matter how much I wore it. The die forming process that Hapur uses must impart a hardness to the silver, compared to the soft cast original rings.

Our friend Antonio forgets or even doesn't know that Hapur's repros are by Sterling 925, more resistant than silver alloy used for Honor rings….that makes the difference.

Ric

**Gaspare** · 05-17-2019, 12:33 PM

Quick current example :

Macro porosity includes all pores whose size and shape can be determined with the human eye or an auxiliary means with the same resolution(such as X-ray method).These are pores with a minimum extent of about 0.5 mm.
Micro porosity includes all pores whose size and shape can not be reliably evaluated with the human eye.They range up to an extent of 0.5 mm diameter.The minimum detectable pore size depends on the resolution of the auxiliary means used.
Porosity requirements must be based on the component loads(static strength,fatigue limit,leak tightness under pressure and function of machined surfaces,appearance of unfinished casting surfaces). It may be useful to define porosity criteria for a component that apply only to specifically defined reference areas.
AND:
Molten silver absorbs oxygen from the air. Solid silver does not contain any dissolved oxygen = any dissolved O2 is forced out of the metal matrix and shows up as inclusions/voids on cooling. Thus you must melt in an oxygen free crucible.

Firma Gahr had nothing close to the equipment now used.. Anything investment cast, die cast etc. will have problems not seen until wear, polish, breakage etc. period.

**Jeff V** · 05-17-2019, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Ric Ferrari View Post

Our friend Antonio forgets or even doesn't know that Hapur's repros are by Sterling 925, more resistant than silver alloy used for Honor rings….that makes the difference.

Ric

True. Here is an article I found on hardness of silver jewelry. It seems the addition of tin, which I believe Antonio found from his test in the originals, does reduce the hardness . 925 silver is typically blended with copper, which is harder.
http://riograndeblog.com/metal-hardn...silver-alloys/

It would be interesting to know if any hardness is imparted from the pressing compared to casting.

**Robert H** · 05-17-2019, 04:08 PM

I would not rate casting inperfect in and outsite at all. We can clear judge the skulls for the given years and judge the rings by self.

**Gaspare** · 05-18-2019, 03:14 PM

Yes ,, All I'm saying there are very big differences in 1st pattern like Robins to include the skull and the later pattern....
Anyone , have ,or have photo of a later pattern displaying such wear...

**Antonio Scapini** · 05-21-2019, 03:34 AM

Yes, I know how the rings are made and no matter the metal used, silver, sterling silver, buntmetall or iron, the production process and the thickness are 99,9% of the times enough to uderstand the way that ring was made, even without make any deep inspection. And yes, die struck rings are much more stronger than cast ones.

Originally posted by Gaspare View Post

Yes ,, All I'm saying there are very big differences in 1st pattern like Robins to include the skull and the later pattern....
Anyone , have ,or have photo of a later pattern displaying such wear...

I'm not going on on this discussion, as you and me both know we are talking about the same things. No need to fill pages of technical descriptions that often cause misunderstanding. We have our email discussion that I consider much more important!

I agree that there is a difference between 1st and 2nd pattern.
Anyway there are rings that shows lots of wear even in '40 style. See this: if it would have been worn for a couple of years more, I'm sure the result would have not so far from the Robin's ring.

Last point: You are right when you say people should understand the differences between the various casting processes. And I stop here!

I forgot one thing: 3rd picture shows some air bubbles areas (single or multiple, but round shapes are well visible) on a '40 style TK ring.

Attached Files

Announcement

Where is the truth on TK rings?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread