The HR could have been engraved in circle or in the flat. Both ways have been proven to be done for many years. Not really a big deal. Lets also agree about the material its made from.. For me not too important. We DO know the 1st and 2nd patterns were a different alloy. And, in the later rings the alloy might have changed year to year as silver became harder to get as the war progressed. So we are ok here too.
- * Now the HR used in Part 2. It has or appears to have no seam.. #1 - is this an authentic HR? The inner band and engraving. How about a simple comparison,,looks at the inner band and engraving on the part 2 video,,,,and compare it to The photo above. Does it appear the same? Almost looks like at one time someone took sandpaper to the inside and then polished it . Jo says it is unquestionable an authentic ring because of the exam show 'micro patina'.. Nice term,,,some don't believe it. I do but don't believe it could show a ring made in the 40s or one made in the 50s,60s,70s etc. There is always a + and a -...... To get its age exactly,,,that I disagree with him..
I'm writing this because we have to realize Antonio might /probably not come back here. But we can continue without him if we want. and we will get to all of his points! BUT 1st,,please members - 1 - does any member have a authentic HR without a seam? Does the inner finish and engraving in part 2 compare to the photo above? Does it matter? 2- do you believe the scope can show a 'micro patina' that can prove it was made exactly during the war years?
Below are Antonios points : Cast proofs: 1- rings shows casting signs everywhere 2- many dies were used to cast them (not only one) 3- some rings are not cut (so casted in round) 4- engraving is made on round rings 5- skulls are cast too
