How to I.D. Red Stones in Ring

[ToddB64]

Hi

Below are two attached pictures of a Ring I found near the edge of a Soccer field using my Tesoro Compadre. I was hunting in All Metal mode and thumbing the dial up and then down.
As you can see from one of the pictures, the ring is the same diameter as a Jefferson Nickel.

After getting a hit, I started thumbing up the arc and lost the signal just below ZN (Zinc), but regained it again thumbing down the arc when the dial indicator mark lined up with the 1¢ mark. At that point I was getting a solid beep in two directions N-S, E-W and a beep as the signal came on and then off the edges of the target. So I dug and the ring was approx. 4" deep. WOW ! Was I ever thrilled !

I used my handmade Density Tester rig with a water bowl of distilled water to test the ring. First, I weighed the ring dry in grams mode, then pressed the TARE button and re-weighed the ring suspended on a length of non-absorbent dental floss fully submerged in the water and not touching the sides or bottom of the bowl. After dividing the dry weight (1.8g) by the wet weight (0.4g) I got a density reading of 4.500 g/cm3, which seems to correlate with Titanium in my Periodic Table. However, I'm not sure what affect the red stones might have on the density reading. These stones are locked into a groove and both sides of the groove are pinched in toward the stones, so removal of even a single stone to weigh it would damage the ring.

*I hung the ring on a string and touched it to a neodymium magnet and there was absolutely no response at all !
(*Note ! Paragraph corrected in 4th paragraph of my post #16 on page #2.)

Unfortunately, I could not find a hallmark, millesimal fineness number or Karat etched or stamped anywhere on this ring using a B&L 10X Watchmaker's Loupe.

If not for the density reading indicating Titanium, I would rate this ring at a very low value. The other negative factor is that there is no visible etching or stamping.

Does anyone know if there is a reasonably inexpensive method of testing one of the stones to determine if it is a valuable ruby or just glass, without removing a stone from the ring ?

My wife likes the ring and I've decided to give it to her after determining it's value.

Thanks for any help you can give regarding my above question.

ToddB64

 

[Ice Scratcher]

Hang it from a string and hold a strong magnet near it, any movement?

<°)))>{

 

[007tallguy]

nice looking ring, congrats!
and i would just take it to a competent jeweler, they'll tell ya.

 

[ToddB64]

Hang it from a string and hold a strong magnet near it, any movement?

<°)))>{

Ice Scratcher.....After receiving an e-mail alert from the website re your post, I realized I had forgotten to add the following sentence, so I Edited it into my post.

"I hung the ring on a string and touched it to a neodymium magnet and there was absolutely no response at all !"

Thanks Pal

ToddB64

 

[ToddB64]

nice looking ring, congrats!
and I would just take it to a competent jeweler, they'll tell ya.

007tallguy......Thanks for your suggestion. I may have to do that.

ToddB64

 

[Ice Scratcher]

I've found a similar ring on a hunt..

Channel set stones, unmarked silver colored metal..

It's with my daughter's keepers, it's a nice ring, still don't know what it's made of..

<°)))>{

 

[ToddB64]

Ice Scratcher........Thanks for post #6 and the nice picture of your daughter's keepers ! I like the alternating red and clear stone arrangement on her ring. Also, you gave me what appears to be the correct term for our rings "Channel set stones".

If I could figure out how to get the weight of one stone without damage to the ring, then it would be easy to compute the weight of my ring without the 36 stones and the true density and metal of the ring !

Maybe we have a member who's a Jewelry maker that has a loose selection of the stones used in our rings and could advise the weight of one. Anyone out there ?

ToddB64

 

[Ice Scratcher]

Just the one ring in that picture went with her "keepers", that was all from the same hunt...

Thanks for the compliment..

These are most of the gold rings I've set aside for her..

<°)))>{

 

[Ice Scratcher]

Many jewelry stores, and "we buy gold" places have a digital analysis machine, it will give an accurate report of any metals contained within the alloy, and the percentage of each... Its a non destructive, non invasive testing method... Although, if they suspect it's plated, (if purchasing) they might want to file/grind a small area for testing...

I suggest calling around to see who might have one near you...

<°)))>{

 

[BottleCapKing]

If you are doing calculations based on mass, your calculations are inherently inaccurate because the mass you are using is the mass of the metal and the stones.

As far as ruby v. glass - if it is a titanium ring, the stones are glass. Rubies are too expensive to set in something as mundane as titanium.

 

[Ice Scratcher]

As far as ruby v. glass - if it is a titanium ring, the stones are glass. Rubies are too expensive to set in something as mundane as titanium.

I guess that is my point as well.. Metal is easier to figure out than stones...

If you figure out the metal, and it's not a precious metal, the stones will be glass or synthetic...

<°)))>{

 

[ToddB64]

Thanks Ice Scratcher and BottleCapKing for your posts today !

Doesn't sound promising that my ring has precious gemstones, so not really worth my time to investigate further.....I'll just give the ring to my missus.

Again, I appreciate your time posting and the pictures !

ToddB64

 

[Ice Scratcher]

Ya never know, keep looking for a convenient place to get it checked..

It not like it is going to change alloys on ya...

It'll be good to know a reputable place for your next questionable ring too..

Good luck!

<°)))>{

 

[tater]

I have a diamond tester. On good stones it can test them as well. I think it was $75. Might look into them.

 

[flyguy784]

If you are doing calculations based on mass, your calculations are inherently inaccurate because the mass you are using is the mass of the metal and the stones.

As far as ruby v. glass - if it is a titanium ring, the stones are glass. Rubies are too expensive to set in something as mundane as titanium.

Seems to me, if he took a stone out to determine its mass, he could then multiply that by 36 and end up with total stone mass. subtract that from total ring mass and bingo. Granted there would be a reasonable error due to the stones not being absolutely identical but I don't think in the grand scheme, it would be that bad. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

 

[ToddB64]

Hi Again Everybody !

Well, my wife helped me solve the mystery !

She was shopping today at J.C. Penny and stopped at a costume Jewelry display and found a ring identical to the one pictured in my thread-starter post #1 for all intents and purposes, except it is Gold-colored metal and all the stones are Clear. It was made in China and had a msrp of $26.00, but was on sale for $7.00, so she bought it for me to experiment with, after which I gave it back to her.

Attached below is a picture of it, laying on a Jefferson Nickel for size comparison. As with the red stone ring in my post #1, it is the same size as the Nickel. The box label says size 8.

As my wife and I discussed this new ring, she reminded me that we had done the neodymium magnet test with the red stone ring touching the magnet by hand (not hanging from a string !). So I made an error in my earlier posts by stating that I had tested the red stone ring hanging on a piece of dental floss. My memory was off !

So I retested the red stone and the clear stone ring, each hanging on a string of non-water absorbent dental floss and both rings were lightly attracted to the neodymium magnet ! By golly, that does make a BIG difference as compared to testing by hand, or for that matter, doing a slide test on a neodymium magnet. Ice Scratcher suggested hanging by a string earlier in this thread and was/is right.

Just for fun and curiosity I did a density test on my wife's clear-stones ring pictured below, hanging by a string of dental floss and submerged in a small clear-plastic tub of distilled water. The test results were a little different than with the red stones ring (See results below.).

Gold-colored metal ring with clear stones, as pictured below.
Dry weight = 1.9 grams
Submerged weight = 0.3 grams
Density = (1.9/0.3 ) = 6.334

Comparable Densities and their Metals from my Periodic table.
Zirconium 6.506, Tellurium 6.232, Lanthanum 6.145, Vanadium 6.11

Vanadium sounded a little familiar to me and after reading a little about it at Wikipedia.com, I don't think it was used to make the Gold-colored, clear-stones, costume jewelry ring and it would require more time than it's worth for me to figure out what metal(s) were used to make this ring.

Anyway, my purpose for this post is to share my latest information and bring this thread to a close.

Thanks to all who have contributed to this thread; it's been fun for me !

ToddB64

 

[KingTotsalot]

If you are doing calculations based on mass, your calculations are inherently inaccurate because the mass you are using is the mass of the metal and the stones.

As far as ruby v. glass - if it is a titanium ring, the stones are glass. Rubies are too expensive to set in something as mundane as titanium.

You are correct for natural rubies, but synthetic rubies have been around before 1900, so if they are manmade stones, they would cost next to nothing.