# Karatclad



## borg

I have run across many vintage items (jewelry, zippo lighters, etc.) marked Karatclad. According to a few internet sources for an item to be stamped as Karatclad it must have a gold coating of at least 100 microns. That would be thicker than most gold-filled right? Also, all Karatclad items I have, or have seen, use 18k to 24k gold. Has anyone processed this stuff? Wondering if it's too good to be true. TIA.


----------



## goldsilverpro

borg said:


> I have run across many vintage items (jewelry, zippo lighters, etc.) marked Karatclad. According to a few internet sources for an item to be stamped as Karatclad it must have a gold coating of at least 100 microns. That would be thicker than most gold-filled right? Also, all Karatclad items I have, or have seen, use 18k to 24k gold. Has anyone processed this stuff? Wondering if it's too good to be true. TIA.


It's 100 microinches (2.5 microns), NOT 100 microns! I used to work for Sel-Rex, the company that owned the Karatclad trademark. Sel-Rex sold gold plating systems and licensed their customers to use the Karatclad stamp. To use it, they had to guarantee 100 microinches of plating. Most all the plating used is at least 99% pure. At a $1243 gold spot, there would be about $1.26 worth of gold per square inch of plated surface area. If the object is worn at all, the value would be less


----------



## FrugalRefiner

goldsilverpro said:


> It's 100 microinches (2.5 microns), NOT 100 microns! I used to work for Sel-Rex, the company that owned the Karatclad trademark. Sel-Rex sold gold plating systems and licensed their customers to use the Karatclad stamp. To use it, they had to guarantee 100 microinches of plating. Most all the plating used is at least 99% pure. At a $1243 gold spot, there would be about $1.26 worth of gold per square inch of plated surface area. If the object is worn at all, the value would be less


There is no substitute for that kind of inside knowledge. Thank you GSP for sharing that with us.

Dave


----------



## borg

goldsilverpro said:


> borg said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have run across many vintage items (jewelry, zippo lighters, etc.) marked Karatclad. According to a few internet sources for an item to be stamped as Karatclad it must have a gold coating of at least 100 microns. That would be thicker than most gold-filled right? Also, all Karatclad items I have, or have seen, use 18k to 24k gold. Has anyone processed this stuff? Wondering if it's too good to be true. TIA.
> 
> 
> 
> It's 100 microinches (2.5 microns), NOT 100 microns! I used to work for Sel-Rex, the company that owned the Karatclad trademark. Sel-Rex sold gold plating systems and licensed their customers to use the Karatclad stamp. To use it, they had to guarantee 100 microinches of plating. Most all the plating used is at least 99% pure. At a $1243 gold spot, there would be about $1.26 worth of gold per square inch of plated surface area. If the object is worn at all, the value would be less
Click to expand...


Thank you for clearing that up. Glad I didn't buy a ton of it then. Most internet sources do indeed show it as 100 microns though. I guess that speaks volumes as to how much misinformation is out there on the web, even from 'reputable' sources.


----------



## goldsilverpro

You're right. Confusion on using correct thickness terms runs rampant on the internet. In the following seemingly official definitions for Karatclad, they use 3 different unit terms on the same page, 2 of which are in error - you would think that the person who posted this would have caught the differences. One micron equals about 40 microinches (.000040", actually .00003937"). One mil equals 1000 microinches (.001"). I would guess that these unit errors originate in industry as inside-the-plant abbreviations of the correct terms "microinches" or "millionths of an inch", (these 2 terms mean the same thing). Millionths is abbreviated "mils" and microinches is abbreviated "microns." These abbreviations may work while verbally communicating inside of a plating shop but they are wrong in the real world. Another reason may lie in the huge advent of "texting", which makes great use of abbreviations and acronyms.

These definitions below use:
100 microinches (correct) which would be = 0.000100"
100 microns (incorrect) which would actually be = 0.004000" - 40 times too thick
100 mils (incorrect) which is = 0.100" - 1000 times too thick

As in the 1st 2 quotes below, 100 microinches is about 14 times thicker than standard gold electroplate (correct) on jewelry which has to be at least 7 microinches in order to call it "gold electroplate."



> "Karatclad is a trademark for a very thick gold electroplating process; this type of plating is about 14 times thicker than standard electroplating." All About Jewels (http://www.enchantedlearning.com/jewel) correct
> 
> "Heavy gold electroplate that is 14 times thicker than is required by marking regulations for conventional gold electroplate. The first heavy gold electroplate, with consistent high karat non tarnishing brilliance, color uniformity and higher hardness is known by its trademark 'Karatclad'." Lenim.com correct
> 
> "Registered trade name for heavy gold electroplate of at least 100 microns thick and meeting Federal Trade Commission regulations. (Antique Jewl University) incorrect
> 
> *— Karat Clad. A registered trade name for heavy gold electroplate, meeting Federal Trade Commission regulations for gold coating at least 100 microinches thick." Donald S. McNeil (ed.). Jewelers' Dictionary. Jewelers' Circular-Keystone (3rd) 1976* correct
> 
> "Indicates a heavy gold deposit, 100 mils, that is a composite metal of two or more layers that have been electrolytically bonded together." Tanury Industries - Plating (website) incorrect


Source: http://www.jewels-gems-clocks-watches.com/gemdict_en/index.php?le=K&la=E&entry=115178

Here's the real FTC regulations, which are the only ones that count. At 100 microinches minimum, Karatclad is considered the same as "Heavy Gold Electroplate" or, as it's often stamped, "HGE" or "H.G.E."


> (4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been affixed on all significant surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold, or of a gold alloy of not less than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness throughout equivalent to .175 microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold, may be marked or described as "Gold Electroplate" or "Gold Electroplated," or abbreviated, as, for example, "G.E.P." When the electroplating meets the minimum fineness but not the minimum thickness specified above, the marking or description may be "Gold Flashed" or "Gold Washed." When the electroplating is of the minimum fineness specified above and of a minimum thickness throughout equivalent to two and one half (2 1/2) microns (or approximately 100/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold, the marking or description may be "Heavy Gold Electroplate" or "Heavy Gold Electroplated." When electroplatings qualify for the term "Gold Electroplate" (or "Gold Electroplated"), or the term "Heavy Gold Electroplate" (or "Heavy Gold Electroplated"), and have been applied by use of a particular kind of electrolytic process, the marking may be accompanied by identification of the process used, as for example, "Gold Electroplated (X Process)" or "Heavy Gold Electroplated (Y Process)."


Source: http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/trade-regulations-rules-and-industry-guides/guides-jewelry-precious-metals-and


I didn't realize that some of the Karatclad jewelry was marked as 18K, so, in that case, my statement concerning the purity of at least 99% would be be error. However, 18K is not necessarily 75% gold when it comes to decorative gold plating. Plated gold alloys are generally lighter in color than their cast counterparts. Therefore, to get an 18K cast color, the gold content may actually be 22-23 karat. Usually, when plated jewelry is marked 14K or 18K, that indicates the color and not necessarily the metal composition.


----------



## borg

Excellent information sir. And while a lot of pieces are marked simply "KARATCLAD", the lowest actual fineness that I have seen marked in conjunction with the name is 18k. (I suppose equal to 18k HGE rings then?) I have three Zippo lighters marked 22k and at least a couple of jewelry items 24k. I have to admit that the stuff looks really good (scrap wise) and is usually 'abnormally' heavy. I have five choker type necklaces that weigh over an ounce each, and a tiny pencil eraser sized tie tac that's 3 grams. Being so heavy, and since gold is heavy, well......

I know better now. I have a pound of hge crap. Luckily I didn't spend much on it so I can probably offload it on Ebay.

Thanks again.


----------



## borg

PS: If anyone is interested in toll refining this material to see what the actual yields may be so results can be posted on the forum I'll go through and pull all I have from my stash.


----------



## goldsilverpro

borg said:


> Excellent information sir. And while a lot of pieces are marked simply "KARATCLAD", the lowest actual fineness that I have seen marked in conjunction with the name is 18k. (I suppose equal to 18k HGE rings then?) I have three Zippo lighters marked 22k and at least a couple of jewelry items 24k. I have to admit that the stuff looks really good (scrap wise) and is usually 'abnormally' heavy. I have five choker type necklaces that weigh over an ounce each, and a tiny pencil eraser sized tie tac that's 3 grams. Being so heavy, and since gold is heavy, well......
> 
> I know better now. I have a pound of hge crap. Luckily I didn't spend much on it so I can probably offload it on Ebay.
> 
> Thanks again.


Right, 18K Karatclad is equivalent in thickness to the plating on 18K HGE rings. 

Even at 100 micro" thick, which is about the thickest gold plating you're likely to ever see (there are very few exceptions of thicker gold plating out there, whether on jewelry or electronics), the gold doesn't contribute much to the weight. For example, if you plated a small 1/16" dia. copper rod with 100 micro" of pure gold, the gold would only be a little over 1.3% of the total weight. If the rod were 1/4" in dia., the gold would run about 0.34%. The "heft" of a gold plated object is definitely not a way to estimate it's value.

As a total guess, your pound of Karatclad would be worth between $50 - $150, depending mainly on the amount of wear, the actual karat of the plating, and the ratio of the total surface area to the total weight.


----------



## nickvc

To reinforce what GSP is saying the lighter and thinner the piece plated is the higher the actual gold percentage, a kilo of plated necklet fittings would have much more gold than a kilo of the chains if plated to the same degree. So the bad news is heavy weight plated items are nearly worthless and especially so if they have that electrolytic vinyl plating,which is really hard to remove, its either labour intensive or produces toxic fumes from incineration, I know I tried with a very large volume over 100 kilos and gave in, it just wasn't worth the effort for the likely returns and to be able to give the customer a reasonable price on his scrap.


----------



## borg

Actually, it wasn't just that it was heavy. It was that it was heavy by comparison to like pieces. Like the tie tack I mentioned. Most tie tacks that size, even 10k-14k ones, usually weigh around 1.5 grams. The Karatclad tack was 3 grams. And it was supposed to be a decent quality jewelry back in the day, so I wouldn't think that the base metal inside would be that "heavy as lead mystery pot metal", but it may be. Just a curious thing.


----------

