Jump to content

Three Finds, But How Many Are Real? Opinions Requested.


Recommended Posts


First off, excellent finds, GB_A, well done!

I can't quite tell from your photo, but your naval button looks authentic and from the condition is probably newer. If the eagle is looking West, it is 1941-present date. If the eagle is looking East, it can be 1851-1941. As you found, the Waterbury Button Company (originally the Scovill Button Co. in Waterbury, Conn.) still makes these buttons as do many other companies for military, reenactors, and non military usage.

My general opinion is that the ring does look gold, however, I can't tell from the photo if the stones were crimped prong set or glued in. If they were glued, I'd think it is not gold. Also a look at the stamp or hallmark would help to make a better guess.

The bracelet looks funny to me. I was in the pawn business for 30 years and have seen a lot of fake jewelry, and without feeling it, it still raises some red flags for me. The stamp is suspect as is the general look of the metal. It is not uncommon to see silver plated brass and even stainless steel jewelry from Mexico with 925 stamps on them. Also the joining bands between the links should have soldered ends, not crimped if it is silver. Did you check it with a magnet? It's just a gut feeling and of course I could be wrong.

Regardless, those are some great finds! 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CPT_GhostLight said:

The bracelet looks funny to me. I was in the pawn business for 30 years and have seen a lot of fake jewelry, and without feeling it, it still raises some red flags for me. The stamp is suspect as is the general look of the metal. It is not uncommon to see silver plated brass and even stainless steel jewelry from Mexico with 925 stamps on them. Also the joining bands between the links should have soldered ends, not crimped if it is silver. Did you check it with a magnet?

Not attracted to a magnet.  The links are crimped, not soldered.  If it's plated it's pretty thick as I can't see anywhere that plating is coming off, which is typical (in my limited experience) when plated jewelry has been in the ground.  (More on that later.  😏)  It might be tricky getting a specific gravity measurement on this as there are so many places for bubbles to attach/hide.  Maybe I can try that with a different liquid that has less surface tension than water.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never heard of anyone making fake waterbury buttons  but I guess it's possible. The ring I'd guess is not real but you should have an acid test kit (cheap) to sort those types of things out quickly. The Bracelet looks real silver to me even with the staining present. I like to throw questionable jewelry finds in the tumbler over night. If it can survive a tumble and shine right up then you may be good to go. Nice to see you venturing out away from coins for a change 😁

strick

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Button is real, might have one like it in my collection. They were made in CT. Chain looks like solid silver. The ring doesn't look like a high end item. First off the way the stones are mounted isn't typical of a good quality ring. Any marks inside for the ring?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great finds and glad that you were able to save them.

Good luck on your next outings.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great hunt GB, the button sure looks original, your soil is kind, or it's a reenactment item. 😀 Naval battle in a park? 🤔 interesting ring and bracelet. If the bracelet is silver, I wouldn't have it already. My wife loves silver and white gold. She'd probably pass on the ring especially if it didn't have a makers mark.

I'd photograph each item individually on a white background and "Lens" them with the Google Lens app. That's got me closest on many occasions. Your attractive red background may work ok tho.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Button looks like a Navy button. I say real. The bracelet is silver. I'm going to say the ring is gold. It looks different then the silver bracelet next to it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, strick said:

Nice to see you venturing out away from coins for a change 😁

Going to respond to the helpful posts, but before that I guess I'll start with this.  :laugh:  As I pointed out originally these all hit in the VDI region I've been accepting for all the years I've owned the Equinox (i.e. 5 years) -- above a fresh drop Zincoln.  So if that was a compliment I didn't deserve it, and if it was a friendly jab, well, the shoe fits so I guess I have to wear it.

Let's get on to the copper (alloy button) first.

22 hours ago, CPT_GhostLight said:

I can't quite tell from your photo, but your naval button looks authentic and from the condition is probably newer. If the eagle is looking West, it is 1941-present date. If the eagle is looking East, it can be 1851-1941. As you found, the Waterbury Button Company (originally the Scovill Button Co. in Waterbury, Conn.) still makes these buttons as do many other companies for military, reenactors, and non military usage.

15 hours ago, kac said:

Button is real, might have one like it in my collection.

6 hours ago, F350Platinum said:

...The button sure looks original, your soil is kind, or it's a reenactment item. 😀 Naval battle in a park?

3 hours ago, Rick N. MI said:

Button looks like a Navy button. I say real.

Seems to be unanimous.  This probably deserves to be in a different category than the other two, since real vs. fake doesn't apply.  Maybe I should have used the word "authentic from the period", but which period?  CPT_G answered that nicely but I'm still left wondering if it could be WWII.  That would have some personal meaning given my father, father-in-law, and two uncles all served in the US Navy during that historic time period.

Sometimes the backstamp details can fit into a date period.  Also, the amount of gold gilding remaining (almost all here) is another indication of how long it's been in the ground, ditto the corrosion on the back side.  I'm WAGging only about 20 years in the ground based on all this plus the depth found.  I doubt it's part of any re-enactment uniform, more likely original military, but what post ~1940 time period exactly -- I'll never know that answer.

OK, ring is next.

22 hours ago, CPT_GhostLight said:

My general opinion is that the ring does look gold, however, I can't tell from the photo if the stones were crimped prong set or glued in. If they were glued, I'd think it is not gold. Also a look at the stamp or hallmark would help to make a better guess.

15 hours ago, kac said:

The ring doesn't look like a high end item. First off the way the stones are mounted isn't typical of a good quality ring. Any marks inside for the ring?

16 hours ago, strick said:

The ring I'd guess is not real but you should have an acid test kit (cheap) to sort those types of things out quickly.

3 hours ago, Rick N. MI said:

I'm going to say the ring is gold. It looks different then the silver bracelet next to it.

A couple things I didn't mention about the ring.  A) the color doesn't look right for white gold.  (Photos, at least mine, aren't reliable to show color so you (plural) didn't have that advantage.)  It really looks like silver to my eye.  Secondly, B) I hinted in an earlier response to GPT_G that there is one subtle sign of plating -- a small dark area that I've seen many times before on plated silver where the plating is breaking down.  But the big give-away was something I did originally mention that most of you apparently missed -- the specific gravity.  According to some internet results, 14k white gold containing nickel has an S.G. of 14.5.  (Apparently there is a paladium version which has S.G. = 16.5.)  Even with my attempt at correcting for the 'stones' I only got ~8 for the S.G. which is more like a copper alloy (e.g. a bronze or a brass).  There was no mark other than a rather large '14k' pressed/punched deeply into the inside.

I thought the VDI was a bit low for either copper alloy or silver alloy, since rings set up such great eddy currents due to their annular shapes.  But I later noticed that the thickness in the front part of the ring isn't so good, and there is one place that shows a possible break or bad solder joint, too.

Conclusion:  silver (alloy) plated copper alloy.

Finally, the bracelet.  I don't quote GPT_G this time since I already did that in an earlier post.  So now the rest of you:

16 hours ago, strick said:

The Bracelet looks real silver to me even with the staining present.

15 hours ago, kac said:

Chain looks like solid silver

7 hours ago, F350Platinum said:

If the bracelet is silver, I wouldn't have it already. My wife loves silver....

3 hours ago, Rick N. MI said:

The bracelet is silver.

Only GPT_G was a holdout here.  But as in my response to him I mentioned I'd do an S.G. determination and now I have.  That came out 9.87.  According to some web info I found that sterling silver is in the range 10.1 to 10.3.  Pure copper is 8.9 and copper alloys (those dominated by copper content) are lower, usually in the low to mid 8's.  So this is looking like the real deal to me, i.e. the '925' isn't dishonest but rather the real deal.

I will point out that I used denatured alcohol instead of water for the Archimedes volume determination.  I used 0.79 g/cm^3 as the density of the alcohol which is correct if pure ethanol or pure methanol.  The can I used said it was a mixture of those two.  (The density of the liquid has to be included in the calculation, but for water the value is 1 g/cm^3 so it's not needed in when water is the medium.)  Ethanol likes to absorb water which I think would increased the density and cause the calculated value (9.87 in this case) to come out low.  There are other potential sources of systematic uncertainty in the S.G. determination, though, (I previously mentioned bubbles which also go in the same direction -- causing a low reading) but some of those can go in the other direction, too.  So it's not proof, just another indication.  For example, the 7.5% comp of sterling that isn't silver can be 'other metals', not just copper.  (See Wikipedia.)  So only the noble metal content is required by law, not the base metals added.  Admittedly this is probably why the range of S.G. was shown as 10.1 to 10.3, though.

Thanks for all the responses.  Oh, and @F350Platinum, I also applied the 'wife' test.  She wants it so that's one more strong 😄 piece of evidence that it's silver, or in the least "worth its weight in silver!"

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...