Down to 2 stones: PLEASE help me here.

[kevinraja]

I am "very" close to making my purchase decision. Out of the following 2 stones, I personally looked at #2. Numbers wise they both sound great. While #1 is 1.52 carat, #2 is 1.71. The only other major differecnce is the clarity, with prices almost the same. I AM LEANING TOWARDS #2, mainly because my girl wants a bigger stone. Any thoughts.......PLEASE

Stone #1
-------------
Price: $8700
Report: GIA
Shape: Emerald
Carat: 1.52
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 64.2
Table: 63
Girdle: STK-TK
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No
Measurements: 7.77-5.75X3.69
Length/Width: 1.35

Stone #2
-------------
Price: $8500
Report: GIA
Shape: Emerald
Carat: 1.71
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
Depth: 63.3
Table: 61
Girdle: M-STK
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: Small
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 8.35-6.11X3.87
Length/Width: 1.37

Clarity Plot for Stone #2 below. I personally saw the #2. Crystals are just in the pavilion just off the table. They are not visible to naked eye at about 10-12 inches. When I stare at the stone from 4-6 inches, I still don''t see it face up. But at an angle, from 4-6 inches, I see them. With a 10x loupe, they are visible at an angle. I also saw reflections of the crystals under 10x loupe. I couldn''t see the crystals when diamond sits on a setting. When viewed through Ideal-Scope, I thought I saw a nice spread of red/pink everywhere but the four corners where I saw white

 

[windowshopper]

#2 IMO--

Less deep, smaller table, better ratio of depth to table anyway and bigger.......................

 

[KBerly]

I agree totally with WS. And the inclusion plot looks good, it''s what you want to see if you are going for an SI clarity in an EC, the inclusions are off to the side, not on the table (maybe a teensy one, but should be fine).