🔎 UNIDENTIFIED Is It A James Avery Ring?

[McKinney_5900]

I found this ring a while back and the hallmark says it is a James Avery. Do you agree? Next question. What kind of stone is in it. It really glimmers. The ring is possibly a retired JA. Thanks.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[grasshopper]

Can't help with the stone, but I would agree the hallmark looks right based on what I see online.

 

[pepperj]

Aquamarine?

 

[McKinney_5900]

Aquamarine?

I hoped for something less of "just guessing", but thanks.

 

[pepperj]

I hoped for something less of "just guessing",

Take a better photo then, and I will eliminate the?

 

[Red-Coat]

Nice ring. Yes, it's James Avery but that style isn't part of their current range. No-one's going to be able to say for certain from a photograph, but I would say it's either aquamarine or blue topaz. The colouration and balance of probability suggests it's more likely to be the latter. Avery used both, but more frequently favoured topaz.

Not your ring, but for comparison only:

 

[GlowingArtist]

It is surgical steel, so made after about 2005? Could be some kind of colored zirconia or glass. It is costume jewelry for sure.

 

[HistoryTeacher]

It is surgical steel, so made after about 2005? Could be some kind of colored zirconia or glass. It is costume jewelry for sure.

Nice ring. I know this is solved, but I don't think it is costume. JA doesn't make much costume. Also, it says "STER" under the logo.

 

[McKinney_5900]

Nice ring. I know this is solved, but I don't think it is costume. JA doesn't make much costume. Also, it says "STER" under the logo.

It is not stainless. It reads a solid 94 on my Manticore, and I happen to have a stainless ring I personally made from a stainless steel nut. It only read 11, eleven.

 

[McKinney_5900]

It is surgical steel, so made after about 2005? Could be some kind of colored zirconia or glass. It is costume jewelry for sure.

What one thing tells you that it is surgical steel?

 

[GlowingArtist]

Look at the metal. Are you not familiar with ST. Try comparing it to the cheap kiosks surgical steel rings in a shopping mall.

My dad made a surgical steel wedding band in 1986 for my brother-in-law because he did tool and dye work.

 

[McKinney_5900]

Look at the metal. Are you not familiar with ST. Try comparing it to the cheap kiosks surgical steel rings in a shopping mall.

My dad made a surgical steel wedding band in 1986 for my brother-in-law because he did tool and dye work.

Have you ever swung a coil over a stainless ring for a Vdi? This one rings a solid 94

Look at the metal. Are you not familiar with ST. Try comparing it to the cheap kiosks surgical steel rings in a shopping mall.

My dad made a surgical steel wedding band in 1986 for my brother-in-law because he did tool and dye work.

It read a 12-47 on my Etrac and the smart screen shows it to be right where silver reads. Stamping stainless with a James Avery stamp on stainless had to make for a hard job. The Vdi of 94 it gives on the Minelab, compared the the Vdi of 11 I got swinging over a stainless ring I made using the same detector just can't be right if it is simple stainless.

A picture can be deceiving, depending on the equipment and lighting and the person taking the photo. The hallmark pic was fairly well done though.

My Whites V3i reads it 84 and it lines up well in the polar chart for conductive. Three machines I own says it is silver.

 

[pepperj]

Nice ring. Yes, it's James Avery but that style isn't part of their current range. No-one's going to be able to say for certain from a photograph, but I would say it's either aquamarine or blue topaz. The colouration and balance of probability suggests it's more likely to be the latter. Avery used both, but more frequently favoured topaz.

Not your ring, but for comparison only:

View attachment 2076237

You're probably right on the Topaz.
I see that the OP didn't acknowledge your post, nor post a better picture.

 

[McKinney_5900]

You're probably right on the Topaz.
I see that the OP didn't acknowledge your post, nor post a better picture.

I responded right before your post.

 

[pepperj]

I responded right before your post.

I was referring to this post, which I can't see your response though.

 

[McKinney_5900]

I was referring to this post, which I can't see your response though.
View attachment 2076390

I am sorry

I was referring to this post, which I can't see your response though.
View attachment 2076390

I was referring to this post, which I can't see your response though.
View attachment 2076390

My BAD. Sorry, you are right. The rings, his and mine, are very similar in real life view. The stones especially.

 

[villagenut]

I think the point being made was to acknowledge redcoats contribution of his research either by a comment or at least a like. No one is required to do so but no one here is paid to research for us either.

 

[pepperj]

I am sorry


My BAD. Sorry, you are right. The rings, his and mine, are very similar in real life view. The stones especially.

It's all good, sometimes things get missed.
Thanks for the update

 

[Red-Coat]

All good with me. I don't necessarily need to be thanked for just a few minutes of my time. Happy to help when I can.