Seems like a good deal, am I missing anything?

[theboss]

This round looks like a decent deal, am I missing anything critical?

Carat weight: 1.00
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: SI2

Depth %: 61.8%
Table %: 55%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to medium, faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong
Measurements: 6.44x6.48x3.99 mm
Price: $4072

EDIT: I had the sarin run on the stone:
crown: 34.7
pav: 41.1
culet: .8%
girdle: 1 - 1.7


Report & Plot: http://www.bluenile.com/certs/2028/GIA14256590_zoom.jpeg

I had the stone looked at and it's supposedly eye clean... although it's a bad scan of the report the table looks to be clear of anything with only small crystrals around the sides and a feather underneath, I'm worried that it must be SI2 for a reason though.

 

[rickyrockranger]

Strong blue fluro is not a great thing to have with a G color stone. Even if it''s not detectable, it still reduced the value of the stone, so that could be a reason...

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hi Boss,
The price sounds low enough to assume some problem or another.
As a "Strong Blue" G color, the stone may trade at a slighly lower price than an inert stone of similar cut quality- that's IF the strong blue is not a noticable thing.
If the stone is dull and milky, as is the case in a small percentage of strong blue stones- the diamond could be worth half what a shiny one is .

 

[icekid]

I agree w/ David. The price for an ideal 1 ct G should be higher than that, so my guess is that it has some sort of problem. You can always but it and send it back to bluenile if you need to though. The problem with bluenile is that they don''t give you enough information about the stone''s cut (pavilion and crown angles).

Also, there''s nothing "wrong" with having strong blue fluor in a G stone. There is a beautiful D stone w/ blue fluor here. Very pretty! As long as you like the look of it, and it doesn''t make the stone milky, then enjoy the discount that it brings to the price!

 

[theboss]

Am I correct in assuming that if the crown angles were less than 30 or more than 35 that they would be in GIA''s comments on the report?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/6/2005 2:05:26 AM
Author: theboss
Am I correct in assuming that if the crown angles were less than 30 or more than 35 that they would be in GIA's comments on the report?

Hey Boss

It would not be in the report. GIA doesn't include that information. You have promising depth and table stats, but without exact crown and pavilion info it's hard to speculate:

Here are two possibilities of what that diamond could look like. One has nice proportions, but check out the pavilion angle on the second one. Much leakage under the table.

So... For prediction, crown and pavilion angles will help. An ideal-scope image would be even better. Human eyes are the best option of course.

ETA: Move to the last two images. Nothing to see here... Move along.

 

[JohnQuixote]

P 41.23

 

[JohnQuixote]

Woops - it''s late and my cat is bothering me.

The first calc was .04 off on the diameter (6.44x6.40 instead of 6.44x6.4. It doesn''t make a notable dif, but for the record here ''tis, corrected.

(darn cat)

 

[theboss]

John, thanks for your reply and explanation, it was very helpful.

I had a sarin report done, I edited the original post but here are the numbers again...

Carat weight: 1.00 (sarin was 1.01)
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: SI2
Depth %: 61.8%
Table %: 55%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to medium, faceted (sarin 1 - 1.7)
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong
Measurements: 6.44x6.48x3.99 mm
crown: 34.7
pav: 41.1
culet: .8%
Price: $4072

I also had the flouro checked and it's supposedly not hazy at all, so I'm comfortable with the strong blue on this stone, as I mentioned before the plot is resonably clean and the top of the stone is eye clean.

I ran it through the HCA and it came up as 2.7 Very Good. And if I'm understanding correctly it's within the AGS0 range.

I know that 2.7 is reasonably close to excellent, do you think that the average consumer would notice the difference between a 2.7 and something like a 1.7? Is that a difference that's viewable to some of you more experienced guys that look at stones every day?

I'm just trying to figure out how much I value I should put on the VG grade from the HCA.

 

[plg_cp]

theboss,
The general guideline is to eliminate poor performers by not considering stones that score above 2 on the HCA. This is noted directly on the HCA webpage. An exception may be if you''ve seen the stone in person and it looks great to you. Technically you''re right - it does fall in the box depicting the old AGS0, but you should easily be able to find a 1ct G/SI2 from a PS vendor with an HCA <2. Some say the sweet spot is around 1.0.

When I was shopping, I looked at some stones in an independent shop for which proportions were available with the HCA scoring over 2. Their performance was nowhere close to that of the WF ACA I ended up with which has HCA of 1.5. By the way, the color and clarity are both inferior in the stone I bought so I''m confident it was strictly the cut quality that differed.

Mark

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/12/2005 5:12:11 PM
Author: theboss






John, thanks for your reply and explanation, it was very helpful.

I had a sarin report done, I edited the original post but here are the numbers again...

Carat weight: 1.00 (sarin was 1.01)
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: SI2
Depth %: 61.8%
Table %: 55%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to medium, faceted (sarin 1 - 1.7)
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong
Measurements: 6.44x6.48x3.99 mm
crown: 34.7
pav: 41.1
culet: .8%
Price: $4072

I also had the flouro checked and it's supposedly not hazy at all, so I'm comfortable with the strong blue on this stone, as I mentioned before the plot is resonably clean and the top of the stone is eye clean.

I ran it through the HCA and it came up as 2.7 Very Good. And if I'm understanding correctly it's within the AGS0 range.

I know that 2.7 is reasonably close to excellent, do you think that the average consumer would notice the difference between a 2.7 and something like a 1.7? Is that a difference that's viewable to some of you more experienced guys that look at stones every day?

I'm just trying to figure out how much I value I should put on the VG grade from the HCA.

TB – You’re quite welcome. Mark's input is sound as well.

Here’s my follow-up on the original diamond:

Depth, table and diameter are excellent. Crown and pavilion angles as reported by Sarin are a bit steep/deep for me without seeing an ideal-scope image. The HCA makes determinations on simple numbers, and going by numbers alone I’d also give this candidate ‘very good.’ I could say more if I could see an ideal-scope or ASET image.

Regarding numbers: Remember that when talking in terms of AGS 0 or ‘ideal,’ the playing field has changed.

The new AGS system is performance, not numbers-based. This differs from HCA and even single reflector views because it takes several views into account.

Former AGS0s with extreme steep/deep numbers will no longer qualify as AGS0 in the new system. On the other hand, moderate steep/deeps are have good contrast and dispersion in the new AGS obscuration metric and are considered robust performers. This diamond is on the border. For me to make a comfortable judgment I would need to see an actual light return image. Quality details such as patterning and minor facet balance not appearing on paper can influence performance, making a border diamond great - or not-so-great.
These will show in an ideal-scope or ASET but not with HCA.

Bottom line? This diamond is likely very good as advertised. Will the average consumer (or even a ‘more experienced guy’

) note the difference between this and one with more ‘cherry’ numbers? Without an ideal-scope or ASET image I can’t predict that... Ultimately it's your eyes that must decide.

 

[Nicrez]

Check the stone's fluorescence when you get it, and if it is not acceptable, make sure you have a good return policy. Strong FL will usually sell a stone at a lower price, so know that a resale (if ever) or an appraisal will also show that price difference.

You also seem to be paying for that magic carat weight. Have you considered dropping to .90 (+/-) ct.?

Good luck!

 

[theboss]

Date: 7/12/2005 6:54:01 PM
Author: Nicrez
Check the stone''s fluorescence when you get it, and if it is not acceptable, make sure you have a good return policy. Strong FL will usually sell a stone at a lower price, so know that a resale (if ever) or an appraisal will also show that price difference.

You also seem to be paying for that magic carat weight. Have you considered dropping to .90 (+/-) ct.?

Good luck!

Do you really feel like I''m paying for the magic carat weight? I actually need something close to 6.5mm because the setting has a lot of side stones and the center stone gets a little lost otherwise.

In my experience playing with PS, I find a slightly cheaper stone (by $500 or less), contact the vendor to see if it''s eye-clean and get details on the cut and more often then not have been told that the stone is no longer available or is not part of their in-house inventory and that they have something better (which is usually closer to $5k than 4, and a little on the small side).

The point of my thread was to determine the value of this stone factoring that my budget is around 4k, give or take a few hundred, and that I need something close to 6.5 too fill my setting.

 

[belle]

Date: 7/12/2005 8:00:58 PM
Author: theboss

Do you really feel like I'm paying for the magic carat weight? I actually need something close to 6.5mm because the setting has a lot of side stones and the center stone gets a little lost otherwise.

In my experience playing with PS, I find a slightly cheaper stone (by $500 or less), contact the vendor to see if it's eye-clean and get details on the cut and more often then not have been told that the stone is no longer available or is not part of their in-house inventory and that they have something better (which is usually closer to $5k than 4, and a little on the small side).

The point of my thread was to determine the value of this stone factoring that my budget is around 4k, give or take a few hundred, and that I need something close to 6.5 too fill my setting.

well, there's a couple to compare to....

here's one and here's another
not much guesswork left on those two.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/12/2005 8:00:58 PM
Author: theboss

The point of my thread was to determine the value of this stone factoring that my budget is around 4k, give or take a few hundred, and that I need something close to 6.5 too fill my setting.

For a 1 carat GIA G SI2 with traditional ideal proportions $4K is quite reasonable, especially if eye-clean. As a purchaser I would still like to see an ideal-scope image (due to steep/deep), but it sounds like this fits your parameters.

 

[theboss]

Date: 7/12/2005 8:55:15 PM
Author: belle

Date: 7/12/2005 8:00:58 PM
Author: theboss

Do you really feel like I''m paying for the magic carat weight? I actually need something close to 6.5mm because the setting has a lot of side stones and the center stone gets a little lost otherwise.

In my experience playing with PS, I find a slightly cheaper stone (by $500 or less), contact the vendor to see if it''s eye-clean and get details on the cut and more often then not have been told that the stone is no longer available or is not part of their in-house inventory and that they have something better (which is usually closer to $5k than 4, and a little on the small side).

The point of my thread was to determine the value of this stone factoring that my budget is around 4k, give or take a few hundred, and that I need something close to 6.5 too fill my setting.

well, there''s a couple to compare to....

here''s one and here''s another
not much guesswork left on those two.

Thanks belle, I need to stay in a G color because of the white gold and sidestones so that I color wouldn''t work, but the 2nd stone, assuming it is eye-clean, does score within the excellent range although it is about $600 more. So I guess the question (mostly rhetorical) is whether or not the difference between a 1.2 and a 2.7 on the HCA is worth $600?

 

[Kaleigh]

theboss,
Only you can make that determination. You have been given excellent advice.