Jump to content

Advice Needed Please On 2.40/f/si1 Round Brilliant Engagement Ring :)


galatie
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I think after months of searching, we have finally narrowed down our search for an engagement ring!!

 

There is one stone on U.S.A certed diamonds which I particularly like. They do not have idealscope or aset images for the stone, but they can send it to a local appraiser before we purchase the stone. The price is 35K, USD. I would appreciate any advice on this stone:

 

2.40 carats

F colour

SI1

excellent cut

excellent polish

excellent symmetry

no fluoresence

8.53-8.60 x 5.3 mm

table: 57

depth: 61.9

crown: 34.5

pavillion: 40.8

girdle: medium to slightly thick

 

It has an HCA score of 1.4. The only thing I am concerned about is:

 

1. the inclusions are on the center of the table - I've been told that the diamond is completely eye clean, should I still be worried about the inclusions?

2. GIA report saids under comments that "additional clouds are not shown" and "surface graining not shown". Is this something I should be worried about?

3. girdle goes from medium to slightly thick and is faceted - is this ok?

4. overall, is this a good stone? Anything I should be concerned about? Are dimensions good?

 

Looking forward to finally ending this search and getting my ring made, so any thoughts would be appreciated!

 

Thank you!

 

post-129551-0-51963600-1327630238_thumb.jpg

Edited by galatie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Galatie:

 

1. Probably not, but the only way to be sure is to see it. People's tolerance for inclusions varies. Certainly there is no structural danger.

 

2. Very unlikely. When things are noted in comments is because they are minor.

 

3. Yes.

 

4. It looks good on paper. Proof of the diamond is in the seeing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies! Relieved that our search may be over! My fiancee and I live in London, and have been ring shopping in London and Antwerp over the last few months, and the prices we've seen online, and from American jewelers in general, is cheaper than what we've seen in Europe.

 

The price was originally $35,308, and the vendor said the best price he can do is $34,800, not sure it's worth trying to bargain down anymore. It's a bit daunting to spend so much on a single transaction, particularly since it's from online and something neither of us have seen with our own eyes yet. We will have the stone sent to an independent appraiser before purchasing, so I'm hoping this will give me further piece of mind that it's a good stone. :) :) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

‘Wholesale’ is a massively deceptive word in this business. Not all stones of the same shape/weight/clarity/color trade for the same price as the Rap list implies and the premise that there is some bottom line ‘wholesale’ number that is the price paid by jewelers is simply false. Dealers do, of course, make a profit at what they do but it’s nowhere near this simple a formula. They don’t all pay the same prices even for the same stone, much less when you consider off-list sorts of variables like cutting.

 

Rshamsaei,

Let me rephrase the question. Can you find a comparable stone (GIA/2.4x/xxx/f/si1) for less money elsewhere? Where? Link please. Maybe you can, I haven’t hunted around and I don’t know how good a shopper you are but, what someone who has never seen the stone calls a theoretical ‘wholesale’, whatever that means, has nothing to do with it.

Edited by denverappraiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone, for the helpful advice so far! I just want to make sure that the 2.40 F SI1 triple x is the perfect stone for me. There was another stone that we were considering as well, it is a 2.30 F SI2 from James Allen. At $26,800 it fits our budget much better and with an HCA score of 0.8. The specs are:

 

2.31 carats

F colour

SI2

excellent cut

excellent polish

excellent symmetry

faint fluoresence

8.51-8.55 x 5.2 mm

table: 56

depth: 61.2

crown: 35

pavillion: 40.6

girdle: thin to medium

 

I am told that the inclusions are not visible at eye level from 10-12 inches. If we were to get this stone, although the specs may not be as good, it would save us 8k... any thoughts?

 

Thanks! : )

post-129551-0-21935100-1327681523_thumb.jpg

Edited by galatie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Visibility of - and tolerance for - inclusions is really a very individual thing. The James Allen stone looks "as good" on paper as the first one, other than the clarity.

 

JA has a 60 days return policy; you could start by getting the SI2, seeing if you like it and the inclusions are bearable; if you don't like it, you have plenty of time to return it and go for the first diamond - or consider Jan's stone, which clearly is eye-clean!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feel like tearing my hair out! Just when I feel like we are ready to buy, one more stone pops up which Iooks like a contender as well. It's still an SI2, but it's 2.11, F, SI2, hearts and arrow ideal cut. The price seems reasonable at $24,780... any thoughts? I am not very familiar with the hearts and arrow type of cut, would it differ from a GIA triple excellent rated stone?

 

 

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1315169.asp

Edited by galatie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GIA cut grading scale looks at 3 measurements that relate to each other. That is to say, the acceptable range for each one will change based on the others:

Average table size over average girdle diameter

Average crown main angle from the girdle plane

Average pavilion main angle from the girdle plane

 

There are 10 additional attributes that stand on their own and must fall within certain ranges:

Average star facet length

Average lower girdle facet length

Average girdle thickness

Symmetry and polish, which are separately evaluated must be ‘very good’ or better (These are the other two 'excellents' in the triple-x).

Culet size.

Max and minimum girdle thickness (not just the average) must not be at the extremes.

The azimuth of the upper and lower girdle facets must be close to standard (this is known as painting and digging)

 

Hearts and Arrows is a pattern seen in the stone when it’s viewed through a special reflecting tool. It requires getting the right crown and pavilion angles, star and lower girdle lengths and the symmetry must be very precise.

 

Obviously there’s some overlap in these two lists but they are not exactly the same. In reality, nearly all of the people who are going to go through the trouble to cut an H&A stone are going to want to meet the ‘excellent’ standards as well so they can get a higher price but it’s not actually necessary. The exception is that there are SOME H&A cutters, like eightstar and one of the Whiteflash lines, using painting and digging to maximize the look they’re going for and GIA will drop them to Very Good or even Good as a penalty. I actually like the look but it’s been commercially a disaster since the GIA scale came out in 2006 and you rarely see it any more in new production stones. Pity. It's not that vanilla is a bad flavor, but it's a shame that GIA is driving everyone to produce it or else.

Edited by denverappraiser
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feel like tearing my hair out! Just when I feel like we are ready to buy, one more stone pops up which Iooks like a contender as well. It's still an SI2, but it's 2.11, F, SI2, hearts and arrow ideal cut. The price seems reasonable at $24,780... any thoughts? I am not very familiar with the hearts and arrow type of cut, would it differ from a GIA triple excellent rated stone?

 

 

http://www.jamesalle...ond-1315169.asp

 

 

There looks to be quite a few inclusions in that stone for about the same price as the 2.03 ct. SI1 G ideal cut diamond with a known 3 very high light performance. The cash price on the 2.03 ct. is $24402.

 

Hearts and arrows doesn't always mean a top light performance. Personally I would go for sparkle versus an image that you never see again once the stone is mounted. The sparkle and light performance can be seen across the room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everyone!!

 

Thank you all for the advice so far - being that my boyfriend and I know know virtually nothing about diamonds, this has definitelly been a bit of a learning process, and this forum has been very helpful!

 

As of now, I think that we will go with the 2.31 F SI2 James Allen stone - although the specs of the 2.40 SI1 are better, I think that the extra 8k is a bit out of our budget, and if they appear virtually identical, I think I will like one just as much as the other.

 

It's really hard to get an idea of size by looking online however. The 2.40 is 8.53 x 8.60 x 5.3. The 2.31 is 8.51 x 8.55 x 5.2. Do you think that the difference in .09 of a carat will be noticable with those dimensions?

 

Although it is a SI2, I've been told that the 2.31 is eye clean. I have ordered an idealscope image to be sent to me in the next few days - will post when I receive. I figure that if the inclusions do turn out to be noticable, I can return the stone under their 60 day return policy.

 

Looking forward to finally getting a stone... soon! : )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference in weight is immaterial except to the price. The difference in diameter is 0.035 mm - if you prefer, it's 1.5 thousandth of an inch. And you will not see it under any circumstances without a precision calliper to measure the stones.

 

Good luck with the purchase, and what follows!

 

If you could post a photo of the diamond and/or the ring and/or the hand with the ring, we would all be very happy to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to be so annoying and ask opinions about so many stones, but here's a new one that just became available on James Allen, and which I've placed on hold. It has a 1.2 HCA. Thoughts on this stone? I think it may be better than the 2.31 F SI2 that we are/were very close to purchasing!!!

 

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1442302.asp

 

2.26

F

SI1

table: 56.2%

diameter: 61%

crown: 34.5

pavilion: 40.8

cut: ideal

polish: ideal

symmetry: ideal

girdle: thin to medium

$30,680

 

I was initially wanted medium to slightly thick girdles - Is thin to medium a problem? Can anyone see any potential problems with this stone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Girdle thickness thin to medium is not a problem. What may be a problem is the large, semi-transparent crystal visible at ~10 o'clock in the virtual loupe. It would not bother me (and it is just about visible in the 5x "starting" image) - but does it bother you?

 

Other than that, you have picked all nicely cut stones - however, they will all look very much alike, so ultimately the decision has to be based on visibility/tolerance of inclusions and price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I am pretty certain that we will be going with the last stone, the 2.26 F SI1. I too, was concerned about the crystal, but I've actually had a friend see the stone in person, and it's visible under a 10x loupe, but extremely eye clean to the naked eye.. so I'm confident with this buy!

 

Now, onto trying to find a setting for it!

 

Thank you very much for all of your help, will definitely post pics of the final product once everything is done! :) :) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...