shape
carat
color
clarity

What is the "right" size diamond for a petite girl?

realtanu

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
72
As per another post, I am engagement ring shopping for my girlfriend. As this is a surprise, I do not have the benefit of her trying on rings etc. I am wondering what the right size to get her is.

Her ring size is 4.5 +/- (I need to get this firmed up.. it may only be 4.0). She is 5'6 and a size 0 or size 1 in terms of dress size. She is very petite.

She doesn't like round cuts, and from what I have been perusing I think I want to go Asscher, which "shorter corner cuts". Maybe Princess of Hearts or Jubilee but I think Asscher is the one. I actually considered Emerald as well 1st, but Tiffany's rep said Emeralds are only only great in large size (2ct+) and smaller cuts don't let them shine out as well.

The girl is very simple and won't like something that is too big/flashy. She considers herself to be a classy girl as well and probably would love to be in Breakfast at Tiffanies. At the same time, she feels guilty about buying a pair of Chanel sunglasses. She does not currently wear rings of any sort.

I am thinking of 1.5-1.75ct. My budget is $12-13K for the diamond (I would like to keep entire ring < $20K, ideally < $15K).

I want her to like the ring, but also wear it. For example, buying a 1.75 or 2ct diamond but to have her not wear it everywhere long-term would be a waste of money in my eyes. on the flip side, I don't want to buy a 1.25 ct and have her or others think it is a small diamond.

At a store, I thought 1.3-1.5ct ct may be the right size, but felt I could go bigger..so hence my range of 1.5-1.75ct

I plan on getting a smaller/classic setting as well (e.g. limited use of micropave if any). Not sure what I am going to do yet, but I really like idea of getting a custom setting, e.g. something from Leon Mage.

Any other suggestions for establishing a proper ratio?

Thanks again
 

jan can

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
116
You could choose a ring and matching WB from a big company that has a 100% return policy for non custom work. If your GF finds it too big or small or not right then she could become involved in the process. With this plan in mind, buy as large as you are comfortable with. If she thinks it is too big, she''ll return it for something less costly. Because she is thrifty it''s unlikely she''d ask you to spend more even if she really wants a larger stone.
 

Gleam

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
565
I think it's less about physical proportions than attitude and how well you carry a ring, big or small.
 

pancake

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
1,509
Realistically, I think only your gf can tell you what is "too small" or "too big". It also depends on her work and what kind of lifestyle she has. Also, asking on Pricescope is deadly - big is king here!!

I am built similarly to your girlfriend - I am 5''5, small build with a 4.5 finger. I wear a 1.2ct emerald cut solitaire and I love it. When we were trying on rings, we looked at face-up dimension more than carat weight as that is what you see. In an EC, I felt comfortable with maximal dimensions of 8mm x 6mm (around 1.5ct). In RBs (which I do not like anyway) I felt that 6-6.5mm (around 0.8-1ct) was a comfortable size. I knew I wanted an EC and we picked one that was on the lower end of my size range (and lower end of budget, actually!) but the most beautifully cut stone that we had ever seen! My work was definitely a consideration too - I use my hands a lot in a very active line of work with some fairly disadvantaged people, and wanted to be able to wear my ring all the time without worrying about it or whether it was alienating the people I work with.

I see many women here who rock much bigger stones on smaller hands and so it is definitely a matter of personal taste.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
Proper ratio?
So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?

The rule is one point per lb.

100 pound women get one carat, (100 points).
200 pound women get two carats.

Imagine the owners of the Hope diamond.
23.gif
 

RaiKai

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
1,255
Well, I am not a size 0, but I am petite (5'4", 115lbs) and with relatively small hands (ring size 5 - 5.25). I still cannot tell you what the right size diamond is for her.

It all depends really on the person wearing it, as unhelpful as that is! Also depends on her lifestyle, the "average" size where you live and what she is used to seeing, etc. Here a 1.25 ct diamond would NOT be considered small at all as the average size is far smaller here.

A 1 or 1.25 on my finger looks quite large. I would not be comfortable with a 1.5 or above as a daily wearing ring as I have a pretty active lifestyle and it just does not "work" for me or my lifestyle, unless it was set really low or bezel set. And I don't wear a lot of jewelery to begin with so....something too large and flashy would feel uncomfortable for me.

I believe an Asscher faces up smaller than the same carat in a round though, so, that may help in your decision!

Still, if you are going for the "surprise" you do risk that it might not be her preference. In my opinion it is risky to go through surprise route unless she has said she WANTS it to be a surprise. Most women in my experience participate in their ring selection these days in some degree as once they actually start trying on rings they may find their preferences are far from what they thought they would be (i.e. a round actually looks WONDERFUL on their finger and an Asscher not so much, or there are some who decide that rounds feel more "classic" to them in an e-ring). Even then, there is no guarantee it will be her "forever" diamond or setting. Some women stop wearing their e-ring after a couple years (especially when kids come along). Some change out their stone or setting at a future date.

That does not mean she won't like it, but you never know. It happens. I would go with a diamond and setting that you can upgrade/trade in at value if you are set on the surprise factor.
 

realtanu

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
72
She has said she would like it to be a surprise. She also said at that time she doesn't like round stones.


I didn't mean to suggest there was a rule, but try to give a picture of who this girl is. In terms of where we live, its all over.. DC, NY and California. In terms of lifestyle she will either be doing office work or become a teacher.

I guess upwards dimension is more important than carat. any advice to give on upwards dimension perhaps? I do feel better that < 1.5ct is also endorsed by members of this board! I guess 1.4-1.5ct may be where I end up. But definitely won't stretch it beyond 1.75ct.

I had decided on going the custom/Leon Mage route.. never realized that would be a mistake. I can't see this girl returning anything I get her.. she is just that type of girl.. she will like whatever I get her, unless its awful. But I guess there is something to be said about going non-custom route. I may end up going custom route, as I would like to have my own imprint on the ring to make it special. I actually wanted to go sapphire as the main stone but I learned that was out of question (diamonds match with everything, mother thinks sapphires can be bad luck for some people).


Thanks for all the help.
 

Collee

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
421
Total personal preference.

I am 5' 2" and less than 100lbs (dress size 00) NYer (Long Island). Based on my lifestyle, personality, occupation, fashion and small frame, IMO a 1.5ct - 1.75ct RB would be most suitable for me. However, since the face-up size of a cushion is smaller I would increase the max size to ~2.30ct for a sqaure cushion stone.

 

atroop711

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
2,844
my sister has her same proportions (height, weight, finger sz) and she has a HONKER (3ct center stone and .75 on either side)
30.gif
 

CharmyPoo

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
7,007
For your information, Asschers face up smaller for the same carat weight. I am guessing here but I think a 1.5 ct will face up at around 6.2 mm and a 2.0 ct will be around 6.9 mm. I believe 1.5 to 20 ct would be a good size for her given the information you provided. I think Leon Mege is a great choice for the setting.

I am also a very petite girl with a size 2.75 ring finger - my ering is 7.2 x 7.2 mm cushion which is about the largest I would want to go for a daily ring.

If I was looking for an Asscher right now, I would jump on Erica's Leon Mege 5 stone asscher (http://www.jewelsbyericagrace.com/antiquevintage_diamond_rings) - scroll down!
 

Brown.Eyed.Girl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
6,893
Hmm... I would say something around 7 mm (~1.75 ct. for an asscher) would look great on a size 4.5. Large enough to see the steps and be substantial, but on her finger size, not so large as to be uncomfortable. And I think it'd look great in a Leon Mege classic setting with claw prongs - classic, clean and beautiful.

ETA: My aqua asscher is 6.6 mm on a size 3.5 and I think it's pretty comfortable. I would say a 7 mm on a 4.5 would be totally fine, and you could probably go a bit bigger actually.

Aqua asscher
 

whitby_2773

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
2,655
hi realtanu :)

just to be clear here...

i believe the average engagement ring diamond weight is around, or slightly less than, 1/2 a carat. so if you''re looking at something in the 1.2 range, nobody is going to think it''s small!

secondly, of course the tiffany rep is going to tell you that emeralds only look good in 2+ carat varieties! what a load of rot! there are members here with FABULOUS emerald cuts smaller than a ct, and the nicest EC ring i saw recently was from a member who had just bought a 1ct stone for his girlfriend-now-fiance, and had it set by leon. it''s GORGEOUS. if it''s size you want, the EC is a way better option than an asscher.

thirdly, take a look at the ring your girl''s friends and family wear. if 1.5-1.75ct is twice as big as any of those (and it probably would be!), and your girl is understated (which is the feeling i''m getting), she might find this overwhelming. in the real world, 1.5-1.75ct is a Very Big Ring.

so personally, i''d vote for a 1.2ct, very white, perfectly cut emerald cut, with tapered baguettes, set by Leon. assuming the settings were the same, the emerald cut would sit lower than an asscher, it''d look almost as big as a 1.5 asscher, if not AS big, and it''d be set by a master jeweler. i''ve had one ring done by leon and am gearing up for a second. i''ve found him a pleasure to work with.

1.2 would still be *so* far above the average sized diamond that she''d almost certainly be thrilled. side diamonds give extra diamond coverage. unless your girl has expressed a preference for a diamond of a certain size, if she''s an understated girl who currently wears no rings at all, she may *well* find a 1.75 stone pretty conspicuous...

good luck making your decision!
 

Brown.Eyed.Girl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
6,893
Date: 3/13/2010 7:18:04 PM
Author: whitby_2773
hi realtanu :)


just to be clear here...


i believe the average engagement ring diamond weight is around, or slightly less than, 1/2 a carat. so if you''re looking at something in the 1.2 range, nobody is going to think it''s small!


secondly, of course the tiffany rep is going to tell you that emeralds only look good in 2+ carat varieties! what a load of rot! there are members here with FABULOUS emerald cuts smaller than a ct, and the nicest EC ring i saw recently was from a member who had just bought a 1ct stone for his girlfriend-now-fiance, and had it set by leon. it''s GORGEOUS. if it''s size you want, the EC is a way better option than an asscher.


thirdly, take a look at the ring your girl''s friends and family wear. if 1.5-1.75ct is twice as big as any of those (and it probably would be!), and your girl is understated (which is the feeling i''m getting), she might find this overwhelming. in the real world, 1.5-1.75ct is a Very Big Ring.


so personally, i''d vote for a 1.2ct, very white, perfectly cut emerald cut, with tapered baguettes, set by Leon. assuming the settings were the same, the emerald cut would sit lower than an asscher, it''d look almost as big as a 1.5 asscher, if not AS big, and it''d be set by a master jeweler. i''ve had one ring done by leon and am gearing up for a second. i''ve found him a pleasure to work with.


1.2 would still be *so* far above the average sized diamond that she''d almost certainly be thrilled. side diamonds give extra diamond coverage. unless your girl has expressed a preference for a diamond of a certain size, if she''s an understated girl who currently wears no rings at all, she may *well* find a 1.75 stone pretty conspicuous...


good luck making your decision!

You know, after reading Whitby''s post, I agree with everything she said. Down to the 1.2 emerald with baguettes by Leon. Gorgeous and elegant
30.gif
 

whitby_2773

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
2,655
realtanu - here''s a photo of the ring i mentioned it belongs to lestat and hopefully he wont mind me pilfering his photo! keep in mind this is a 1ct center stone. i love the way it sits on his fiancee''s hand and, as you can see, the side stones definitely give ''presence''.

hope this helps :)

lestatsgirlsringab.jpg
 

CBL

Shiny_Rock
Trade
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
172
Wow, Whitby is right on the money. That ring is stunning, classic, blingy but understated. It is perfect.
 

Dreamer_D

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
25,247
I also think that from how you describe your gf, she would like a nice EC. They face up great for the carat weight and they are not as deep as asschers, so can sit lower to the finger. I think a 1.5ct EC would be *awesome*.

Gummibear has my all time favourite EC setting, which is by Leon with trap sides. Totally to die for! Picture below, and here is the thread: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/calling-em1-dani-peaches-gummis-ring-is-finally-here.112202/ Hers is 1.8ct but you could easily scale down slightly.

gummiring8_dd.jpg
 

Hest88

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
4,357
Massively agree with Whitby. You can also go with an asscher, but of modern cuts my heart always belongs to ECs. I was just at a meeting where two women each had gorgeous (albeit large) ECs and they were stunning. Understated and classic, yet so mesmerizing.

I'm probably around the same size as your GF. This is my wedding set, size 4.25. The stone is a .82, the rings about 2mm each. Frankly I wouldn't mind a much larger stone (and by much larger I simply mean 1.25 to 1.5), but what saves my set from looking proportionally small on my fingers is the way the low basket head creates that gap between my rings. The width of everything together (two rings plus gap) actually make them just the right width on my finger.

So, two things: 1) do make sure whatever e-ring you get allows for a w-ring to sit flush against the e-ring. I've come to love my gap, but it really bothers many women 2) what's less important than her finger size is the length. My fingers are average--not too short but not model-long either. If she has stubbier fingers she will probably be fine with a smaller ring, but if she has very long, slender fingers for her size you definitely want to aim for something larger than a 1 carat.

hest88ecset.jpg
 

realtanu

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
72
wow thank you for the continued advice. head is spinning (in a good way).

I like the tapered baguettes idea on the emerald a lot. Really adds the emphasis without adding the size of larger side stones which bothered me. And one of my concerns the asscher is they may be too raised. I really goofed by not driving up to L.A. today to check out rings.

Your point on family is helpful. Unfortunately I do not remember what the mom wears nor will I be able to remember. However I imagine it most definitely must be < 1.5 carats. 2.0 carats may be much. When I saw 1.7carats my eyes began to play tricks where 1.5 carats seemed small...

I am glad Emerald is back in the picture, albeit not sure now how to proceed. I figure I need to decide what diamond & setting I want before visiting Leon, ERD, GOG etc. right? My head spins just trying to fill out Leon''s quote request form.. and that was when I just wanted to see asscher settings..
 

realtanu

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
72
She has long fingers. I don''t know how to quantify unfortunately, but they are thing/long. extremely thin wrists as well (small frame overall).

I love the design of your ring a lot. not sure if it is "her" though. i can see her liking that design (it feels more classic, and she LOVES period piece movies..) but she is a modern/contemporary girl.

I won''t be buying wedding bands at the same time. I didn''t realize that was customary. But I figure not a big deal to buy them later. The wedding wouldn''t be for a while, so plenty of time to get bands later on. Thank you for the advice though on the flush/vs no flush.
 

clgwli

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
902
I have to agree with everything that whitby said! If you think there is a chance at all that she will be a teacher, I would go with a set that will not gap and not be too high off the finger. Particularly if she will be teaching younger kids. Rings should fit her lifestyle so I would keep it elegant and classic.

I personally love an asscher cut on my hand, but it is a personal preference. I wear a size 4 and have short fingers so I don''t quite appreciate overly rectangular looks on my hand. I am shorter than your girlfriend, but very petite as well. I personally find 1.5 carats to feel large on my hand, but that is a personal preference that we can''t answer for you. Just remember what the average size of stone in the US is and you''ll be on the large size if you are 1 carat or over.
 

Brown.Eyed.Girl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
6,893
Date: 3/13/2010 9:00:53 PM
Author: realtanu
She has long fingers. I don''t know how to quantify unfortunately, but they are thing/long. extremely thin wrists as well (small frame overall).


I love the design of your ring a lot. not sure if it is ''her'' though. i can see her liking that design (it feels more classic, and she LOVES period piece movies..) but she is a modern/contemporary girl.


I won''t be buying wedding bands at the same time. I didn''t realize that was customary. But I figure not a big deal to buy them later. The wedding wouldn''t be for a while, so plenty of time to get bands later on. Thank you for the advice though on the flush/vs no flush.

If she has long fingers, I think an emerald will really look great on her. And of course, tapered baguettes add some subtle but not overwhelming bling
1.gif


On the wedding bands thing - if you think she''ll want a flush-fit later it''s good to tell the person making the e-ring that (because some e-ring settings don''t allow for a flush-fit and the e-ring setter will be able to take that into account.
 

ms.halo

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
431
I''d go with an emerald cut in the largest size you can afford in your budget range (so 1.75?). Honestly, I don''t know many girls who feel like their stone is too big. But there are quite a few that wish theirs were bigger...
 

Dancing Fire

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
33,852
Date: 3/13/2010 5:37:40 PM
Author: kenny
Proper ratio?
So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?

The rule is one point per lb.

100 pound women get one carat, (100 points).
200 pound women get two carats.

Imagine the owners of the Hope diamond.
23.gif
wife said...2.5 points per lb.
20.gif
 

Brown.Eyed.Girl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
6,893
Date: 3/13/2010 9:53:44 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
Date: 3/13/2010 5:37:40 PM

Author: kenny

Proper ratio?

So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?


The rule is one point per lb.


100 pound women get one carat, (100 points).

200 pound women get two carats.


Imagine the owners of the Hope diamond.
23.gif
wife said...2.5 points per lb.
20.gif
Date: 3/13/2010 9:53:44 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
Date: 3/13/2010 5:37:40 PM

Author: kenny

Proper ratio?

So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?


The rule is one point per lb.


100 pound women get one carat, (100 points).

200 pound women get two carats.


Imagine the owners of the Hope diamond.
23.gif
wife said...2.5 points per lb.
20.gif

DF''s wife = smart lady.

Kenny''s system =
14.gif
(no offense Kenny
2.gif
)
 

jan can

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
116
Date: 3/13/2010 7:29:45 PM
Author: whitby_2773
realtanu - here''s a photo of the ring i mentioned it belongs to lestat and hopefully he wont mind me pilfering his photo! keep in mind this is a 1ct center stone. i love the way it sits on his fiancee''s hand and, as you can see, the side stones definitely give ''presence''.

hope this helps :)
I LOVE that ring.
 

SparklyOEC

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
1,391
Date: 3/13/2010 7:18:04 PM
Author: whitby_2773
hi realtanu :)

just to be clear here...

i believe the average engagement ring diamond weight is around, or slightly less than, 1/2 a carat. so if you''re looking at something in the 1.2 range, nobody is going to think it''s small!

secondly, of course the tiffany rep is going to tell you that emeralds only look good in 2+ carat varieties! what a load of rot! there are members here with FABULOUS emerald cuts smaller than a ct, and the nicest EC ring i saw recently was from a member who had just bought a 1ct stone for his girlfriend-now-fiance, and had it set by leon. it''s GORGEOUS. if it''s size you want, the EC is a way better option than an asscher.

thirdly, take a look at the ring your girl''s friends and family wear. if 1.5-1.75ct is twice as big as any of those (and it probably would be!), and your girl is understated (which is the feeling i''m getting), she might find this overwhelming. in the real world, 1.5-1.75ct is a Very Big Ring.

so personally, i''d vote for a 1.2ct, very white, perfectly cut emerald cut, with tapered baguettes, set by Leon. assuming the settings were the same, the emerald cut would sit lower than an asscher, it''d look almost as big as a 1.5 asscher, if not AS big, and it''d be set by a master jeweler. i''ve had one ring done by leon and am gearing up for a second. i''ve found him a pleasure to work with.

1.2 would still be *so* far above the average sized diamond that she''d almost certainly be thrilled. side diamonds give extra diamond coverage. unless your girl has expressed a preference for a diamond of a certain size, if she''s an understated girl who currently wears no rings at all, she may *well* find a 1.75 stone pretty conspicuous...

good luck making your decision!
Ditto everything Whitby said! Being on the very petite size myself (much shorter than your gf), I would reiterate what Whitby said about your gf feeling conspicuous depending on the diamond and her. I personally have no problem whatsoever wearing a bigger diamond, but I get the feeling from what you posted, that she may? I actually had a .90 ct asscher at one time, and, to me, it looked like I was wearing a .50 just to give you an idea that asschers really do face up smaller. Good luck.
 

Gypsy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
40,225
Correct answer to the topic is: whatever size she wants.
1.gif


As EC''s can face up smaller than some other cuts, I''d go for the largest F-G eyeclean diamond you can afford and put it into a three stone with baguettes or bullets, like Whitby suggested. If I had to pic my ring all over again, I have a feeling this is the ring I would end up with... it just looks so elegant and clean on the hand. I honestly can''t imagine any woman not loving such an lovely ring.

Can''t wait to see what you decide!
 

joxxxelyn

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
146
"At a store, I thought 1.3-1.5ct ct may be the right size, but felt I could go bigger..so hence my range of 1.5-1.75ct "


Speaking as someone with a 4.5 ring size and on the slim side, I can tell you that my 6.7 mm round (pictured in the avatar) feels like the right size (at 1.18 carats). It''s still a bit large, but not so much that I feel odd, and I''m sure shrinkage will happen (although, it hasn''t happened yet in nearly a month). If it was a squared shape I may be comfortable with a bit more weight because the shape is stretched lengthwise, but still nothing near the upper end of what you quoted. I definitely would be way overwhelmed with 1.5 or more. If you halo it, definitely take that into consideration as it will add lots of spread.
 

susimoo

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
1,807
Date: 3/13/2010 5:37:40 PM
Author: kenny
Proper ratio?

So small women should get small diamonds and large women should get large ones?


The rule is one point per lb.


100 pound women get one carat, (100 points).

200 pound women get two carats.



Kenny, I am going to start the "eat as much as you can diet" today.

Where do I get the contract that says once I eat my way to 200 pounds I get the 2 carater?
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top