Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Are thin rings really too delicate?

JPie

JPie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 12, 2018
Messages
4,173
I keep reading over and over that rings less than 2.0 mm are too thin and lack structural integrity. This flies in the face of my personal experience; my e-ring and two of my right hand rings are all 1.0 mm wide and I’ve worn them for years with no issues. I have other rings from 1.5 mm to 1.8 mm that I’ve also worn frequently without issue. The only ring I’ve had bend out of shape was a custom piece of crap I bought from Trabert Goldsmiths.

So are thin rings really problematic? Or is this just a jewelry urban legend?
 
I don’t think it’s an urban legend. Like anything, there are good/better/best versions.

I happen to really love and stand by anything Gurhan makes, including seemingly very delicate 24k 1-2 mm hammered bands. I wore a few for years and not a single one was out of round by the time I decided to sell them.
 
VRBeauty said:
It depends on whether it’s a plain metal ring, or set with stones. There have been some spirited discussions on this topic over the years - mostly over in the Rocky Talky forum, BTW. I’m not sure anymore which is THE thread, but here are a few to consider:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-thin-is-too-thin-of-band.108044/

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/are-rings-too-thin-these-days.155780/
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links. I’ve had both pave and plain shanks hold up fine. I really do suspect that this is more a testament to the skill of the jeweler than anything else.
 
monarch64 said:
I don’t think it’s an urban legend. Like anything, there are good/better/best versions.

I happen to really love and stand by anything Gurhan makes, including seemingly very delicate 24k 1-2 mm hammered bands. I wore a few for years and not a single one was out of round by the time I decided to sell them.
Click to expand...
That’s impressive considering how soft 24K gold is.
 
It depends on the design and the size of the stones set in it and a few other things. For clients with 90 point or 1 carat diamonds and diamonds of that general size range, we do 2mm shank settings all the time with sturdy (but pretty) baskets. No problem. I have a 2mm shank on my engagement ring (my diamond is just over a carat). It is a reinforced cathedral shank though with solid wires in the under-gallery to support it and the diamond is set relatively low. But I don't wear it in the house and I am not at all hard on my rings. I've been wearing a 2mm Scott Kay platinum pave wedding band for a decade-- the thing is built like a truck though, with 6 tiny (and ugly under magnification) prongs on each diamond. And I don't take it off except I check it regularly (never had an issue). But it's a band. It doesn't get knocked around and it sits right next to my (plump) fingers.

For a large center diamond solitaires-- not recommended. Thin Leon Mege's solitaires were all the rage on here for years, and for large diamonds too. After a few years people started reporting issues with their rings. Handforged. Platinum. A little warping in the shank can reverberate up the setting and start loosening things. And the less metal and the more delicacy the more potential for problems. Also larger diamonds sit higher up, and they get knocked around more. Ding, dang, bing, boom... and each little hit takes it's toll.

So the answer is: it depends on the design of the ring (it's not just the width it's the depth of the metal too) and size of the stones and how they are set.

We do caution our clients strongly when they want to go too thin for the design and the size of the diamond. And we have refused to do rings that we feel are not going to be structurally sound long term.
 
Last edited:
Mine is about 2mm and is 100 years old (platinum)
 
I think it depends on lifestyle too and maybe metal and even how old they are. I have a few rings that came from my grandmothers jewellery box. All 3 of them have gone out of round and are so thin they need a reshank to be worn safely. One appears to be an antique ring that I didn't even know she had so I really have no clue where she got it or what it was put through. The jeweller who redid the prongs thought it must have been worn a very long time for that damage to be done.

Her other 2 rings are her wedding and engagement ring from her second marriage. These I do know what she probably did in them. She was a house cleaner and at one point worked in a hospital doing some sort of menial work so I imagine she did absolutely everything in her wedding set for it to look the way it does now. And she got divorced from him sometime in the late 90's so she had stopped wearing it by the time I was old enough to be helping her work. I don't feel like she was even married for more than 10 or 15 years.

So yeah :) just my experience though. Plus my own experience has been that the gold did thin out on my own gold ring I wore doing everything including derping around lifting heavy weights at the gym because I didn't quite understand that it probably isn't a great idea to wear diamonds to the gym. It also loosened my diamonds and I was lucky none came out and this is a channel set band so not even pavè. But I understand that not everyone has this experience. It's just been mine so I've gotten slightly more careful and remove my stuff for activity like the gym or any heavy cleaning where I am lifting furniture. I wear my rings through everything else though.
 
JPie said:
I keep reading over and over that rings less than 2.0 mm are too thin and lack structural integrity. This flies in the face of my personal experience; my e-ring and two of my right hand rings are all 1.0 mm wide and I’ve worn them for years with no issues. I have other rings from 1.5 mm to 1.8 mm that I’ve also worn frequently without issue. The only ring I’ve had bend out of shape was a custom piece of crap I bought from Trabert Goldsmiths.

So are thin rings really problematic? Or is this just a jewelry urban legend?
Click to expand...

if they're thin they have to be tall and your beautiful kataoka ring is tall...i think all their rings are, right? i'd bet that's what gives them more strength than you'd expect for how delicate they look. my heirloom ring which is a thin platinum band (less than 2mm at the bottom, about 2mm at the top) is out of round, it's an oval now. :/
 
@LaylaR thanks for weighing in!

@LJsapphire it’s stunning!

@MeowMeow man, your grandma did not baby her jewelry! I admit that I do take mine off when I get home and when I work out.

@bludiva that’s correct! They’re about 2.0 mm tall and taper from 1.0 mm thick at the base to an even thinner edge with milgrain.
 
What it comes down to is how hard someone is on them firstly and how well they are made secondly.
Someone may destroy the very best of them in a couple days where someone else may wear a weak one for decades with no issue.
When making rings and recommending settings for the general public the tend is to stray towards the common.
The common is that for many people even well made a thin and delicate ring may be problematic for them.
 
My great aunt wore her wedding set every day for well over 50 years. She was notoriously careless, not sure she ever took them off. They were very thin, made from platinum, and the only repair was when I had her ER. There was a very slight crack where the shank joined the head of the ring, other than that, they never got misshapen during all her years is ownership.
 
My plain 18ct Lucida band is 1.75mm wide, but 2mm high. I am hard on my hands, and I mean REALLY hard, and after over a year of almost constant wear on my RH (& I am right handed) it is still pristine.

My grandmothers original engagement ring from 1937 is a smidge under 1mm at the thinnest part of the shank underneath. She wore this ring until the day she died & I have worn it a lot since. It is so thin that it’s actually sharp to take on & off, so when my hands get hot it feels uncomfortable & I have to put it away. Obviously it wasn’t originally this thin & has worn away over time, but it has never (touch wood) become misshapen. It doesn’t have any depth to that section of band, again less than a mm.
 
My Leon is a little misshapen and the edges a little bent. It is 2mm and three sided pave. I still love it. It hasn't lost a stone. If it did I would probably replace it. I have had it almost nine years I think.
 
My grandmother used to tell this story.
Back in the day, a long, long time ago, she was feeding clothes into the wringer washing machine. Somehow, her finger got in there and her ring cracked. The ring impaled the flesh of her finger on both sides, like a caliper, if you can imagine that.
She started screaming and the neighbor came running over and pried the ring off her finger with two pairs of pliers.
This is why you should never do any real work while wearing a thin, worn ring.
And why we don't use wringer washing machines anymore.:eek2:
 
Karl_K said:
What it comes down to is how hard someone is on them firstly and how well they are made secondly.
Someone may destroy the very best of them in a couple days where someone else may wear a weak one for decades with no issue.
When making rings and recommending settings for the general public the tend is to stray towards the common.
The common is that for many people even well made a thin and delicate ring may be problematic for them.
Click to expand...

I am a case in point. A jeweler who knew me and my jewelry well told me I am very easy on my jewelry. I have never had trouble with thin bands and I have many of them. One reason I am so easy on them is that, with the exception of a wedding band, I rarely wear a piece of jewelry for long. (I mean, I keep pieces for many years but do not wear a piece day in and day out without taking it off.)
 
I love delicate thin settings. I have a wedding set that I inherited 30 years ago. It is a beautiful 14k yellow gold e ring and anniversary band with a .5 center transitional diamond. The Ering shank is dangerously thin. The jeweler originally told me I should replace the setting as it would never last. I was too sentimental to replace it and have worn it off and on for the past 30 years with no problem! I have not worn it to the gym and do not do yard work or chores while wearing it....so it does get babied!!!
 
I've had a few thin bands and most of them wore fine. One of them went out of shape right away and I returned it. I've had a shank split before. None of them were a ring I wore daily. I would think solid bands would hold up okay but hallow ones might be more likely to break or bend. Also if you get them sized a few times it might make a difference.
 
marcy said:
Also if you get them sized a few times it might make a difference.
Click to expand...
That can make a huge difference, also "fixing" them by making them round again can cause issues.
Every time you move metal you add stresses and work harden the metal.
White gold is the worst for this happening as many alloys work harden and get brittle very easily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top