Originally Posted by Dave
Antonio, please tone down your messages.
Hi Dave, sorry if I wrote something wrong, I thought that quoting what he wrote about his theory and how he denigrates my work without knowing it, was not a problem (all the quotes were taken from this forum so not sure why they were deleted).

Anyway I don't think someone who wrote conflicting theories will ever have real evidences to support his denigrations.

I honestly beared for too many years too many attacks and nonseses to keep my mouth closed again. So everytime one of the "experts" and their theories surface, I'll be happy to be there asking for proofs and to show him all the nonsenses he wrote during these last 5 years. I am not an expert, I simply ask the experts to reply.

About the production method Dave, I would say it is necessary to understand many things before understanding it. It is also not easy to explain for me (since I don't know english so well to really be clear), and because Gahr changed dies but also ring bands for 4 times between 1933 and 1945 and rings are multiple pieces made...

Originally Posted by Gaspare
Well we have the 1st and 2nd type HRs.

Evgeniys HRs are very well made both in look and quality... But look at a 2nd type authentic HR and that tells you it wasn't a simple investment/lost wax cast.... - *Antonio I'd say your book is a close as we're going to get without a time machine! Many who have read it and understand the science like it.. I showed the book to a local jeweler and after 15 min flipping thru said 'WOW', This is a weird ring for whatever reason'.

He doesn't know nazi theme pieces but knows, mass production press method, lost wax [both vacuum and pressure assist], 'pie plate' multiple manufacturing, and he said its none of them..
What puzzles him is that no 2 are the same microscopically but show some matching traits.. We aren't talking just the hand finishing,,it was other things he saw.. We know the skulls were a piece on their own so there is conformity. he mentioned the bands are puzzling and agreed with the books findings.
It's very easy to criticize something without actually reading/seeing the findings. So unfortunate for Don its wasn't how he says they were made..

So name calling, criticizing [especially when you have not seen the book] is just unfair and its another person like Don who for years made plenty of money assuming things and is claiming to be a expert for whatever reason..

Anyone is always encouraged to offer a theory on how they were made. . But so far it is just calling another's findings wrong without offering their theory...
Be careful out there guys. General consensus on authenticity most of the time is dangerous. 20,,50, years from now a good aging on Evgeniys HR and it too will be authentic!

SO,,IT is very simple - , are there any of you out there with the book and after reading it totally disagree? and why..

Thanks for your calmness and for your words.
I agree with you, since I told it some years ago me too, Evgeniy rings in some years will be sell as originals. Furthermore people don't understand that with 100$ you can have a "perfect" copy that with some artificial aging is very close to an original. I asked to make copies, also with soldered skull, and it is quite simple with a nice ring.

I would really like to discuss on rings, several things are IMO still on the table (like the engraving for example!), instead quote denigrations...