Monday, January 03, 2011

GS: A Royal Knock off

Years ago, an Industrial Design Prof. once said 'If you are going to steal a design, steal a good one and make it better.' But apparently this isn't the rule with knock offs.

I was doing cardio at the gym, attempting to ignore Fox News on the tv in front of me, when an ad for a 'Royal Ring' that caught my eye. And even from my elliptical I could see that the only thing it had in common with the Princess Diana/Kate Middleton engagement ring was a oval blue rock and some white stones surrounding it. The ring was missing major details that would make it a replica.

Now, maybe these are details that only a jeweler would notice. But I think this could be a good way for everybody to learn a little about jewelry design and the anatomy of a ring.

The ring to the left is Diana's ring and the right is 'replica' ring.

So, the overall look is a blue oval stone surrounded by white stones in a white metal. Can those 3 design elements make a replica? Notice the white stones surrounding the center. On Royal ring there are full cut round white diamonds, 14 to be exact, while the replica has 8 oval cz's.

Unfortunately I cannot get a close up of the royal engagement ring, but even from this distance you can see that the original has a thin/dainty band. The replica has a wide split shank. The original actually has a split to the shank too, but it is to add height to the band in order to support the height of the head and stones.

Finally, the last obvious visual difference is the type of prongs. On the original ring has a good amount of prongs that have a 'claw' like feel. The replica has typical rounded top prongs that is on most jewelry today.

And then there are differences in the specs of the rings, as in:

Princess Diana Ring Royal Ring Knock off

Centre Stone Genuine Ceylon Sapphire
12 cts Deep Cut
Oval Faceted Faux Ceylon Sapphire 5.65 ct

Surrounding Gemstones 14 Brilliant Cut Diamonds 8 oval cz's 3.6cts

18kt Silver
Made By Garrard, London. The World’s Oldest Jeweler Who the hell knows

Price 1981 Price thought to be £30,000 or $48,000. Reported to have since been valued at £250,000 or $400,000.00 $19.90

So, overall, this is a fairly poor replica (even though it comes with a certificate of authenticity and a decorative velveteen ring box.) But if you are looking for a fun piece of costume jewelry to wear for a few times before it fall apart or is lost, twenty bucks isn't a bad deal.


Apparently I found one of the BETTER knock offs! This one, offered by QVC is nearly double in price & much worse quality.

When you look at it closely you will notice the THE STONES AREN'T EVEN SET! It's glue! There are fake prongs to add the appearance of being set, but they aren't pushed over the stones... and there aren't even fake prongs around the center stone. Also, the shank is completely wrong because it is too heavy and with milgrain added to it. But, worst of all, is the fact that the center stone isn't even close to the same color of blue.

These replicas are just getting worse and worse!


Ashley Do said...

This one is even worse:

tracey said...

Ooo! Thanks for sharing that one, Ashley! These are so horrible... it's not like it's a trademarked ring, so SOMEBODY could do better ;)

Joseph Hope said...

Sweet piece of jewelery, royal ring for those who are near heart. Lucky really. Urns for Ashes

chelsea said...

Oh, very beautiful gem.
Like this post!

Windows Server 2008 | Website Marketing Service

lady.ann57 said...

What a beautiful and stunning engagement ring.

rolex replica watches

Mike said...

Very beautiful piece of jewelry. It suiting with your navy blue color gown. You both are looking gorgeous together. Love you Guys :)

Ka U'ilani Kim said...

That is not the QVC one.

Ka U'ilani Kim said...

Also replicas do not have to be exact, since the definition is CLOSE or exact copy.

Ka U'ilani Kim said...

The other one is Kenneth Jay Lane, which he sells through QVC, but is not theirs.

Locations of visitors to this page