Unless someone is investing in "fine jewelry" they don't usuall want to pay
the extra for 14k. I see a simple 14mm lobstercalsp in my Rio catalogue.
In gold filled it's 6.49 for 6. In 14k it's 13.07 for one. Most people
don't want to spend the extra $10 to have a 14k clasp.

It's gold plate you want to avoid. Wears off quickly with moderate wear or
even handling. "Gold filled" had a much thicker layer of gold and won't
wear off for most people for as long as they own the piece.

Tina


"CLP" wrote in message
news:qqzSa.13784$zd4.11582@lakeread02...
Yes, but for selling finished work that you've invested a lot of time in,
isn't 14 or 18k at a minimum, more desireable? I see gold filled clasps
that
look nice now, but won't they wear off and be cheap looking? Obviously I
don't know much about this. I guess I should research what the gold filled
is, actually. It seems that if I put so many hours into a piece that
should
last a lifetime, I'd want to have solid gold findings... I appreciate the
input, thanks.



"Christina Peterson" wrote in message
news:1058713597.623560@prawn...
Sure is. 14k is 8 times as costly , 18k even more. And 24k is both
more
expensive and softer, wears faster.

Tina


"CLP" wrote in message
news:wVxSa.13624$zd4.3642@lakeread02...
Is there any reason one would use gold filled findings instead of 14,
18
or
24k gold?

TIA
Christy