Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Are rings too thin these days?

LGK

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
2,975
Yssie|1296707520|2841575 said:
Another point of interest, and I think relevant to this thread - prongs.


I had a very interesting convo w/ Leon from WF (not Mege!) today regarding some small adjustments to my ring.

One of the things that came up was claw prongs. My prongs are pointy, but not velociraptor-y (to misuse Deco's terminology). I confess, I have always admired those velociraptor-y prongs, and asked if they could be shaved down... but Leon noted that the thinner they are the more likely they are to loosen slightly with time and wear, and the longer and pointier they are the more likely they are to catch on things as they loosen, and the thinner they are the more likely they are to bend when they catch on things.

Seems obvious, in hindsight, but it wasn't something that I thought of when I admired those needle-thin claw prongs :sick: I have to say - those few sentences totally cured me of my practical desire for velociraptory-y prongs. He's going to make them just a tad pointier for me.
Yeah. I have to say that structural integrity is a practical thing- perhaps something that the more practical among us consider more heavily than, say, me for example. I rarely look at a setting and wonder "huh, wonder if *that's* gonna fall apart!". Mostly I just consider the aesthetics and workmanship related to that. Frankly I thought this thread was very good- I may have to reset a stone sometime in the more or less near future and durability isn't something I would have considered enough, probably. Beyond maybe if melee is likely to fall out. But a setting like Harriet's? That, I would have thought was pretty durable, y'know?

And I also think that pics on the net can contribute to people wanting uber-delicate settings- what looks huge and clunky in an enormously magnified pic can actually be way, way more delicate IRL, and there's often no way to really know that unless you have physically tried on a setting in person. (For example standard, blobby prong ends look gigantic and fairly unattractive in pics, but I have several settings with them and they're like, what, way smaller than a poppy seed really? Hardly an eyesore.) Victor Canera's work, for example, looks more metal-intensive than Leon's particularly in shank thickness.... but I bet in person, his work is extremely proportional and plenty delicate- but at the same time his stuff looks designed to last a lifetime, of actually wearing the ring every day! (I'm definitely putting him on my short list of possibilities for handmade.)

But yeah- in hindsight- DUH tiny prongs might loosen more than larger ones. But the obvious can be, well, elusive to those of us (like me!) who get caught up in "oooh sparkly!" :bigsmile:

I have no doubt that a lot of first time e-ring buyers have NO clue that PT is very bendable/malleable. There's so much bad info out there in the jewelry world, on so many subjects...
 

CherryBlossom

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
311
Yssie|1296707520|2841575 said:
Another point of interest, and I think relevant to this thread - prongs.


I had a very interesting convo w/ Leon from WF (not Mege!) today regarding some small adjustments to my ring.

One of the things that came up was claw prongs. My prongs are pointy, but not velociraptor-y (to misuse Deco's terminology). I confess, I have always admired those velociraptor-y prongs, and asked if they could be shaved down... but Leon noted that the thinner they are the more likely they are to loosen slightly with time and wear, and the longer and pointier they are the more likely they are to catch on things as they loosen, and the thinner they are the more likely they are to bend when they catch on things.

Seems obvious, in hindsight, but it wasn't something that I thought of when I admired those needle-thin claw prongs :sick: I have to say - those few sentences totally cured me of my practical desire for velociraptory-y prongs. He's going to make them just a tad pointier for me.


That makes complete sense... great points. BTW Yssie, you seem to really be into the science of jewelery design/metal/cut so could you recommend any good books/articles that focus on the science behind all of this ???
 

CherryBlossom

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
311
CharmyPoo|1296453002|2837979 said:
CherryBlossom|1296415462|2837458 said:
Charmypoo, no offense (I swear!) but I've seen your beautiful rings over the past few months. You had the privilege to be blessed enough to be provided with the option to take your time looking for a designer and had your e-ring redesigned more than 2x. But most people out there simply cannot afford having two rings made multiple times by two different designers. And they do not have the option to switch one out for the other. They are only able to make this purchase once and want to make sure that it's done right. The reason why they come up with the funds to pay for the premiums of a more expensive designers like Leon Mege (and others that they learn about via this site) is because they assume that these vendors do EVERYTHING well (both aesthetically AND structurally)

I wasn't going to respond but then feel the need to clarify a few things. If I had it my way, I would only want one ring made by one designer ONCE. The multple remakes have caused unnecessary stress. I did not make dedicated threads discussing the problem and the resolution of both my rings. However, I feel like I need to explain myself. Unlike others, I didn't really change my mind as we have always wanted one design based on the first ring we tried on together.

My first ring was suppose to be my only ring but the designer was not able to execute what we discussed - we then had the ring remade in a design that she was able to execute. My heart still wanted the original design that my fiance picked out which is when we decided to go to Leon to make me the ring. Leon ended up making the wrong design and he remade the ring at no cost to us. For us, we felt we probably should have went to Leon to begin with and would have ended up with the ring we wanted ... I was scared off by the negative threads on PS about his personality. I am plesantly surprised that I get along fine with Leon and dispite the error on his part ... I still got what I wanted and no major damage to my life.

So am I in the same boat as others - I think so. I was lead to believe that my design would be executed asethetically but it wasn't. In the end, the jeweller done right by me and I am a satisfied customer so I am not going to whine and complain about it. My second incident was just a mistake but the jeweller also made it right ... so again, I am not going to complain about it - I am very happy with the ring now.

Yes, we are lucky to be able to get the ring we (or I) always wanted but I sure would rather not spend the extra money to get what I wanted to begin with.

You know I wanted to apologize to you. I think the hurried way that I made my comment was a little bit too direct and almost rude. English is not my mother language and sometimes I sound a bit more rude than what I am trying to convey. I apologize for that. It's difficult to express exactly what I'm thinking on the internet. Overall while someone like my mom or aunt would be able to do something similar to what you were forced to do (and my aunt actually has) I personally wouldn't be able to do so. I would have to be happy and live with the "messed up ring" for a few years until we're both done with school. I think class issues plays a major role in this, which is why some of us might be super hyper sensitive/paranoid about it :/

But again, I am sorry for the way I worded myself. I do not think that about your situation.
 

partgypsy

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
6,548
Though I'm not into Mr. T-sized rings, I have had the same thoughts/reservations Kenny has had about some designs I've seen here and elsewhere. And the thought of all that pave, in addition to maybe popping out from the stress of being on the band, that having pave means having to essentially carve out little holes in the metal of the band, weakening the strength of the band. So I cringe a little when I see that 3 sided pave on a super thin band.

There are 2 "pushes" and they go in opposite directions. I am spending all this money for an engagement band, I want to get the most beautiful feminine design I can think of. But at the same time since it is your engagement ring one should consider one will want to wear it, possibly every day, for years and decades on end and SOME consideration of durability should come in.

So for all those people asking, can they make my band 2 mm or 1.8 mm, etc, the answer is yes. The question is, do you really WANT to be wearing a 2 mm band every day, knowing you are running a risk?

Myself I am more comfortable with a thicker band, and luckily I like that style.
 

kennedy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
284
Yssie|1296707520|2841575 said:
Another point of interest, and I think relevant to this thread - prongs.


I had a very interesting convo w/ Leon from WF (not Mege!) today regarding some small adjustments to my ring.

One of the things that came up was claw prongs. My prongs are pointy, but not velociraptor-y (to misuse Deco's terminology). I confess, I have always admired those velociraptor-y prongs, and asked if they could be shaved down... but Leon noted that the thinner they are the more likely they are to loosen slightly with time and wear, and the longer and pointier they are the more likely they are to catch on things as they loosen, and the thinner they are the more likely they are to bend when they catch on things.

Seems obvious, in hindsight, but it wasn't something that I thought of when I admired those needle-thin claw prongs :sick: I have to say - those few sentences totally cured me of my practical desire for velociraptory-y prongs. He's going to make them just a tad pointier for me.


I had a very similar discussion with Maytal Hannah when she was making my RHR. I sent her pictures of a Leon Mege ring and told her I wanted prongs similar to those in the picture. She said she could do it, but wouldn't recommend it as there simply isn't enough metal to reliably hold the stone in place. She agreed that it looked nice now, but that prongs do serve an important purpose and need to be more than barely there. After hearing that, I wondered if this might be the reason that other jewelers can never exactly replicate Leon's super thin, pointy prongs -- it's not that they are not capable of replicating them, but simply that they do not believe it's a safe practice, however nice it looks.
 

Matthewmon

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
80
I needed this thread because it brought me back to reality but it has kinda bummed my fiancee and I out. If we really really like the look of a very thin setting but don't want to spend thousands of dollars on it only to see it warped 5 years later how about getting a setting like this white gold 1.4mm band for only $563? How long do you guys think it would last? If it only lasted 5 years it wouldn't be too bad since it only cost $563. Thanks for your opinions!

http://shop.goodoldgold.com/index.cfm/a/catalog.prodshow/vid/47070/catid/170
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
56,669
There's no telling how long it will last because it is impossible to know what your ring will go through, but it might last longer due to it being 14k gold instead of platinum. I think the price is very reasonable and worth a try as long as you are prepared to replace it in the future if it doesn't hold up.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
This thread is so interesting. I read it when it first came out, and then not two months later became the owner of a very thin (1.55 mm) hand forged diamond ring. I've been wearing this ring since April and have not had one issue with it, yet. It is still perfectly round, everything is tight and secure. Basically, it looks just as it did when I first got it, save for some wear and tear on the rose gold on the palm-side of the shank.

That being said, I think it would be wonderful to compile a collection of updates on very thin rings. If a PSer has a thin setting and it does suffer, it would be nice to have a place to post pictures to share. I think some people ignore practical warnings when they're in the ring-shopping process because emotion takes over. But perhaps pictures would be a more effective PSA.

All that being said, I think it was Charmy who said that a thicker ring wouldn't be worth it to her because she prefers the thin aesthetic and therefore wouldn't love the ring as much. I have to say I agree. While I didn't specifically ask for my ring to be this thin, I love it exactly as it is, and now that I have it I wouldn't want to go for a thicker setting just because it will be sturdier. I wear my ring every day and I take care to baby it. Even so, it may still go out of round or get bent at some point. I understand that. I'm not interested in wearing a ring that isn't beautiful to me, and if this is my idea of beauty, I'll take the risk.

I often wear very delicate fabrics, as well. And a lot of fussy white pieces. Yes, I have to be very careful with them, and I can't just throw them into the laundry bin when I'm done. But it's worth it to me because I love the way they look and feel, and I'm willing to put in the extra care they require.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be warned about thin rings, and I do think there's a difference between a ring that is just plain too thin and one that is thin enough to require extra care but not so thin that it is sure to fall apart. I think PSers' horror stories would provide an excellent PSA, and I wonder if there's a way to compile them for the sake of a general PSA.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
29,377
Haven I think you have a wonderful attitude.
You understand the concerns of these settings and you accept responsibility for what may happen. :appl:

I wish all women with them shared your knowledge and attitude.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
56,669
Haven, I recently bought an 18k wg antique ring and the bottom of the shank is quite thin. My 2mm original e-ring bottom shank (which was probably less than 2mm when new) is also on the very thin side after 25 years. It never went out of round. I think that is what you'll more likely see...gold wears away over time and shanks can become very thin. People sometimes have to replace part of the shank. I think soft platinum is more likely to go out of round in a thin ring and that is why I find out what the platinum alloys are when possible.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
diamondseeker2006|1323053662|3074300 said:
Haven, I recently bought an 18k wg antique ring and the bottom of the shank is quite thin. My 2mm original e-ring bottom shank (which was probably less than 2mm when new) is also on the very thin side after 25 years. It never went out of round. I think that is what you'll more likely see...gold wears away over time and shanks can become very thin. People sometimes have to replace part of the shank. I think soft platinum is more likely to go out of round in a thin ring and that is why I find out what the platinum alloys are when possible.
I think you're right, Diamondseeker. I wear a ring that was my grandmother's. She wore it every day that I knew her, and it was given to her in the 30s or 40s, so I'm guessing she wore it for a long time before I was ever born. The palm-side of the shank is definitely thinner than the rest of it.

Nonetheless, I'm still happier wearing rings that please my aesthetic. I didn't choose this super-thin shank, but I sure do love it.

Kenny--You are too kind, thank you.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
56,669
Oh, I agree, Haven! Your ring is gorgeous!!! :love: I think gold is harder than some platinum, so you should be good for a long time!
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
Thank you, Diamondseeker!

Prior to PS, I definitely never knew that gold can wear out so much during one person's lifetime, so I think it's really important that people are aware of it. My original set was platinum, and it does make me feel a bit "EEK!" when I think of the metal on my new ring wearing away over time. I know I shouldn't worry, but it is troublesome.

The stone in my original e-ring was set in a shared-prong eternity band with 5ish pointers and that definitely went out of round after some wear. I didn't mind, and it wasn't to the point that diamonds became loose, but the platinum was pliable, I suppose you could say. DH always said "What are you doing to squash your ring?!" I blame the doorknobs.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
56,669
Yes, I am really careful not to grasp doorknobs or even things like pot handles without being conscious of my rings! I have milgrain on my wedding band, so I have to be careful, too, if I want it to last!
 

MissStepcut

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
1,720
diamondseeker2006|1323061975|3074379 said:
Yes, I am really careful not to grasp doorknobs or even things like pot handles without being conscious of my rings! I have milgrain on my wedding band, so I have to be careful, too, if I want it to last!
It's a little embarrassing to admit, but when I find myself grasping handles tightly, I always think, "Good thing I don't have an eternity band!"
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
29,377
I'm also careful grasping doorknobs because my thick, macho, beefy tension setting may damage them, not to mention my massive, powerful, bone-crushing, iron grip. :twisted: :lol:
 

jrich

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
138
Kenny and anyone else who wants to weigh in...
I hear you on there is no definition of safe, but can I get your opinion on this setting? I had in my mind it seemed thin, and I did not choose it for this reason, it just happens that this is my favorite setting I have seen, and I have been searching for my upcoming ering for a long time. I plan to get this in 14K yellow gold, with somewhere around a 1.1 carat round.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/-18k-Yellow-Gold-Pave-Set-Diam-Engagement-Ring.html

As always- thanks!
Jessica
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,660
jrich|1323114990|3074711 said:
Kenny and anyone else who wants to weigh in...
I hear you on there is no definition of safe, but can I get your opinion on this setting? I had in my mind it seemed thin, and I did not choose it for this reason, it just happens that this is my favorite setting I have seen, and I have been searching for my upcoming ering for a long time. I plan to get this in 14K yellow gold, with somewhere around a 1.1 carat round.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/-18k-Yellow-Gold-Pave-Set-Diam-Engagement-Ring.html

As always- thanks!
Jessica

It's definitely thin, but the good thing is that there is no pave on the shank. A solid shank without pave will be more durable than a shank with pave.

Some of the rings I've seen on PS, while gorgeous, are just insanely thin. I remember reading once that someone wanted a pave band to be 1.5mm wide. :-o That is just asking for trouble in my opinion.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
29,377
Jrich, that looks to me to be one of the safer settings.
The head does not meet the ring at only one point.
There is a protective metal ring around the main diamond.
Even the melee have lots of metal around them.
 

jrich

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
138
Kenny, thank you so much that makes me feel much better about my choice!
 

SunnyGirl0282

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
3
CherryBlossom|1296389642|2837192 said:
oh wow I am so happy you posted this because over the past few months I have been dealing with this in regards to my mom's ring. We have spoken to a dozen online vendors (who are on and off this site) along with jewelers at regular B&M. I have collected so much information on this issue and I agree with EVERYTHING that you have said. I think it's beyond just a thin band, but it also has to do w/ the type of pave and also if it's platinum or not.

My mom started out wanting to put her 2.5+ct asscher in a Harry Winston type replica or split shank/prong. She started out wanting a 1.5 mm V-cut/cutdown/fishtail pave. After speaking to vendor after vendor we came to realize that it was just a BAD idea for any diamond over 1.ct - if that at all- to be put into this type of setting. Some of the more reputable vendors that we came across (God bless MC2 and others) seem to be very hard core about making you sign some kind of waiver if you go this route and did not want to offer the same type of customer service care... that should send give you enough warning flags. My fiance, an engineer, broke down the basics mechanics of elasticity/flexibility/torque/metal breakdown. If you like this type of ring and insist on french cut/v-cut/cutdown/fishtail pave's to be used you are literally taking more and more metal out of the ring. It leaves little for the diamonds to hold on to throughout the shank. Furthermore, if you end up using platinum or even 18k gold you make the situation even worse. We all love platinum, but it is VERY soft. While you may not lose any platinum, it will move, warp, and change over time... add to that the whole "less metal" issue that's brought on by the v-cut pave's/3 sided pave issue and you got the perfect recipe for disaster. lets not even kid ourselves, no matter how careful we are w/ our rings we're going to end up knocking it around. My fiance told me that even simple lifting something, gripping the steering wheel too hard, or pulling a chair forward hard enough can do enough damage over time. And guess what? three weeks ago my friend bent her 1.7 mm v-cut pave ring by lifting her heavy laptop with just one hand. within seconds she had an indentation that looked "^" in her ring that she paid nearly $5k for (just setting) because she wanted it hand made. Pop pop pop and out came out three stones in the shank. Her 1 year warranty from the designer expired just 2 months ago, whomp whomp.

After collecting all of this info, my mom decided to to forgo the 1.5 mm shank (she's getting a 2.4+ mm instead) and also decided to let go of the v-cut/fishtail/cutdown pave. She opted for brightcut instead, which provides her with a delicate look without cutting out a bunch of metal. She really wants to keep this ring for years and more importantly wants it to be an heirloom piece. Why ruin all of that just for a thinner band? She's still going to baby the ring, but hopefully this will make things much better.

BTW, it was very eye opening to find out which vendors would warn us about these dangers and who wouldn't. About 60% of the vendors that we learned about via this site told us of the dangers and gave us warnings about having to baby the rings. One vendor directly told us not to do it and they are the one who suggested brightcut to us. we appreciate that very much, although we will not be using them this time around. Another group of vendors not only failed to warn us, but actually acted like it was not a big deal and in fact told us that the thin look was much better :( that was very insincere. I have so much respect for the vendors who not only warned us, but used it as an opportunity to educated/inform us without being condescending about it. One B&M vendor whose made some wonderful delicate pieces for us in the past (old school guy who makes gorgeous handmade pieces) in his super sweet and cute accent had this to say "you ladies keep saying less metal, less metal. I get it, you have the (yes, he said 'the') war with the metal because you are all delicate ballerinas who want the wonderful princess ring, but your ring is going to fall apart in a few years. The last five people who came in here had their rings made by others and I fix their ring, but it's not right that other stores do not tell them the truth. I want to make you something nice that will be a princess ring still but will always look gorgeous on your precious fingers, not break." :D

Thanks for the info Cherry...I've been looking at engagement rings for a while now and this website has been so very helpful! I know I want a cathedral set, RB, but I'm deciding between a plain band and a micro pave bright cut. I love the thin look, and I want it to be tapered at the top. Do you have a pic of your mother's ring you can share? It sounds like it might be right up my alley.

Looking forward to your reply!
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
I forgot about this thread!

Just to add my own update: I've been wearing my 1.55 mm very thin upgrade ring since April 2011, and a year and a half later it is still perfect. Well, at least IMO. :cheeky: It hasn't gone out of round or anything, at least.

Hopefully it won't happen, but if it ever does I'll dig up this thread to update. :cheeky:
 

malish985

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
166
I'm really glad I found this thread. I've been looking at settings and i really like the thinner delicate halo settings. However my fingers are long and size 7 and the very thin bands don't look that great on my fingers, rather they get lost. I've been somewhat upset because I did want the thin band where the emphasis would be on the rock. Reading this thread puts things in perspective and I feel better going with a 2mm+ shank as it will improve durability, not just the look.

Thanks!
 

March-8-2008

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
190
This is such an educational thread!!

I read the whole thing yearrrrs ago, and I would love to read some wear updates from the thinly-ringed who posted previously. It's been six years since most of the posts.

I'm coming up on ten years with my own thin Tacori set, so this thread has really been of interest to me. Thanks to all for your comments and knowledge.
:wavey:
 

totallyfree

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
198
Almost a year on with my own thin Leon Mege ring... and I am kinda-semi looking forward to the option of 'upgrading' the setting in the future if/when it does go out of round or breaks. I have taken to wearing alternative bands (gold and silicon!) to the gym, bike riding and the like. My wedding band will be an equally thin ring from EWB, it's a very dainty combo!

Finding a local jeweller to do a slight resize has been impossible. I got an earful from one who said it never should have been made that thin blah blah blah. Well it was, and I did buy it and it is on my finder. An interstate jeweller has advised they can resize from pics and will confirm when I am there in person.

I am in the same camp as the other posters: I chose a thin ring knowing that they day I need to replace or repair it might come within the next 12 months to five years. I wouldn't say I am "prepared" to lose the stone if the prongs failed, but it is a risk I have taken.
 

lalala

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 13, 2017
Messages
577
I didn't read through the whole thread but it's kind of funny how much style changes in 6 years.. that's all you see now! I personally have a thin (I think it's thin? - 2.2mm) pave setting and haven't any issues in the 3 years I've had it. I wear it to the gym, horseback riding, etc.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Get the Look: Moira Rose
    Get the Look: Moira Rose
    Spic n' Span Sparkle - How to Clean and Protect your Jewelry
    Spic n' Span Sparkle - How to Clean and Protect your Jewelry
    January Birthstone 2021: Red Garnet
    January Birthstone 2021: Red Garnet

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top