4 replies to this topic

[JOS]

Hello friends,

I am stuck between three stones and I can't make a solid decision. I'm a bit crunched for time, and i'm prepared to delay this thing if i have to, but I feel like i'm close. I was all set on a Whiteflash ACA, then I stumbled upon two more I like. Please take a look below and let me know what you think.

WF ACA

AGS certified Triple zero
1.324 ctw / H/ SI1 / Fl: neg
Total Depth -61%
Table - 55.8
Crown Angle - 34.8
Pavilion Angle - 40.8


Hearts on Fire
AGS certified Triple zero
1.3 ctw / H/ SI1 / Fl: neg
Total Depth -62%
Table - 56.7
Crown Angle - 34.9
Pavilion Angle - 40.8

It is also laser engraved with the HOF ID #.


Third option
GIA certified
1.29 ctw / G/ SI1 / Fl: neg
Cut- EX
AGS Light per- Ideal
Sym- Superior
Pol - Ex
Total Depth -61.03%
Table - 57.7
Crown Angle - 34.86
Pavilion Angle - 40.94

Please take a look and let me know if there's anything significant I should know about the differences here.

Thanks

[davidelevi]

Decide based on how well you get on with the vendor, price and visibility of inclusions. All 3 "look" great on paper, and all 3 come from good, reputable vendors. Also, all 3 are (again on paper) within a whisker of each other in terms of proportions, so ought to look pretty similar.

Edited by davidelevi, 11 January 2012 - 01:00 PM.

[denverappraiser]

HoF is generally counted as a 'brand' and some people attach value to that inscription. Others don't. The difference is up to you and whether or not you and/or your beloved would do so.
As I recall, the WF-ACA's also have an inscription for whatever it's worth.

In the case of the first two you're paying a slight premium for AGS-000 and the third one has a slight premium for the G color. I don't have a problem with either of those. I agree with Davide above...They all look fine on paper. Pick based on the dealer and what they have to say when they actually look at the stone(s).

I would add that 'superior' symmetry on #3 is not in the GIA grading scale so I would question that. If not GIA, WHO graded it and on what scale?

[JOS]

Thanks for the input. On your last comment, i made a mistake when i wrote that post. The optical symmetry is graded as superior. The symmetry is graded as excellent.

May i ask your opinion about twining whisps? These are primary inclusion in the first one from WF, but they are all white. I saw the stone in person and it is truly eye clean, but the whisps are all through out the diamond. Have you seen this type of thing affect performance at all?

[davidelevi]

I think Neil's question still stands, although it has its answer in the posts. I believe - but it would be good if you could confirm - that the third stone is at Good Old Gold ... which I think is only fair to mention, considering you have publicised WF and HOF.

Re: twinning wisps (or any other inclusion): trust your eyes. In general, inclusion graded below I2 do not affect performance. Delving in the details is good, but ultimately people look at diamonds using their eyes - usually without a loupe.

Edited by davidelevi, 11 January 2012 - 10:43 PM.