UBB.threads Forums Uniform & Accessories The Honor Ring Forum TK rings were cast or die struck?

[quote=Gaspare]
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?






It is very sad that Antonio does not come back and refers/answers to Matthew?s post about die casting. Imho this does absolutely exclude the die cast theory.


1 - unfortunately I personally do not own such a "seamless" ring. Although I have seen some "seamless" ones, obvious period ones, in the net I personally do not believe in true seamless. Imho they do have nearly invisible (to the naked eye) seams. I have had a private discussion on this phenomenon. First of all there should be done exact examinations if there is REALLY no seam. It is said, metallurgically the deathhead and the other ring do have differing alloy. It should be examined IF this is right and IF yes, it would need an examination for the case of a "no seam" if the deathhead and the ring have the same or differing alloy, so this would be a proof to the one or the other side.
There could be also done a serious metallurgical examination of the seam area (eg. with special acid) which would show different metals and might not have the dangerous effect of heating (as suggested).
Imho I do NOT believe in a no-seam-ring until there is a SERIOUS, SCIENTIFIC proof.

2 - due to more than 70 years these rings are around, the "micro patina" might (for me: sure) have changed a lot of times. Artificial patination at GAHR, polishing by the wearer, wearing by the wearer, again polishing (not known how often), natural patination and much, much more. I can show you rings in my evidences which have been offered through the years and each time they were offered they did look TOTALLY different concerning patination! As said, they were polished, repatinated, polished again and so on. How do you want to see "micro patina" on such rings (most rings got abourt the same treatment during 70+ years!).


I think it is a shame, that there is a mudslinging behind the curtains, concerning Gaspare, who is trying to do his very best and in a most honorable way! It does not look to me that "Mr. exactly exactly" does the same.

@jim_m, this have been my own misgivings in a private discussion. IF the collectorship beginns to accept any casting process as THE period manufacturing process for SSDeathHead Rings (and it is my serious and honest opinion, due to experiencees, it is NOT!), the door is open for the mass of fakers to produce "better" and "not so good" "PERIOD" rings by casting.
Even more (sorry, I cannot read Italian) it is said, Mr. Scapini has told the collectorship in his book the ring has been die pressed. Now he says it has been ean error and it is die cast (which cannot be as our member Matthew has proofed!!!), why didn?t he make the mistake NOW (die cast) instead of his first opinion (die pressed)