shape
carat
color
clarity

Which platinum band would you get? Help.

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by 21paul1975, Apr 14, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
  1. 21paul1975
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    by 21paul1975 » Apr 14, 2010
    I am getting a platinum 950 Ru 6 mm sz 9 half round standard fit wedding band and have the option of thicknesses of 1.1 mm, 1.5 mm, 1.7 mm, or 2.0 mm. All are within my price range, but do get more expensive with additional width. I am looking for the balance between a thin sleek band, but also sufficient strength to protect against the band bending or distorting easily. Which would you get? Is 1.5 mm sufficiently strong?

    Thanks!
     
    


    


  2. pixley
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,596
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    by pixley » Apr 14, 2010
    I would go with the 2 mm for an every day wedding band. It's plenty sleek looking, but will have a little more substance and strength. 1.1 sounds a little scary, not to mention uncomfortable. Are you near a place that you can try on different wedding bands of varying thicknesses? I did this during my search and found that the 1.8 mm bands were too thin for my taste, and my ring size is 4 1/4, so it was somewhat of a surprise.

    ETA - There are thin WBs that compensate for their thinness by augmenting the height of the metal. If you're wearing this next to an E-ring, you may want to check to see whether they'll sit well together.
     
  3. yssie
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    19,580
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    by yssie » Apr 14, 2010
    by "width" do you mean how wide the band is horizontally across your finger, or "depth" - how high the band sits off your finger (thickness)?



    Echoing pixley - remember that when the shank goes to the extreme in "width", they must increase the "depth" to keep it strong enough to wear, so a 1.1mm wide ring is going to be very thick - probably thicker than your E-ring shank. That may or may not bug you, it would bug me [​IMG]
     
  4. 21paul1975
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    by 21paul1975 » Apr 14, 2010
    thanks for the feedback, and apologies for the confusion on my meaning of "thickness". I am referring to "depth" or height off the finger. The width of the ring is 6 mm, so it is the depth that I am asking about.

    I did go to several stores in the nearby mall and found that 0 out of 6 salespeople I spoke with at 4 different stores had ever heard of "depth" and did not know the depth of the rings they were selling. Zero! One store did measure the depth on a ring they had in store and found that it was 1.8mm.
     
    


    


  5. shimmer
    Brilliant_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    1,702
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    by shimmer » Apr 14, 2010
    My DH''s wedding band was 5mm wide and 1.3mm thick (platinum) and we felt it was too thin. The edges were so thin it was uncomfortable for him. In that width I would go for 1.7mm or 2mm. I would also pay the extra for ''comfort fit'' in a band this wide.E-Wedding Bands has the best prices in comfort fit that I have found, this is where we got our bands and they were very accommodating in returning my DH''s band.


    Mine is 2mm wide and 1.3mm thick and it''s perfect, so I think it really depends on the width of the band.
     
  6. pixley
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,596
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    by pixley » Apr 14, 2010
    Ah, I see - that's different.[​IMG] 1.7 - 1.8 does sound like a good depth for a ring and I would agree with Shimmer that a "comfort fit" band is worth it! I wish mine were comfort fit. There's an immediate, noticeable difference.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Share This Page