about to buy e-ring, should i be concerned about shrinkage?? thoughts?

[pons]

OK i''m in my final stages here, and i''m about to drop serious dough on an E-ring close to 14-15K (the setting is $$, custom halo/pave - check it out at www.lockesdiamonds.com), anyway, since i only have 1 shot at it, should i get a 1.31 G VVS2 carat asscher or a 1.55 H SI1 carat asscher? I''ve seen the larger one in person, and to me, it looks fantastic colorwise and is definitely eye clean.

my question pertains to shrinkage. She tried on the 1.55, and while beautiful, our first impressions (since it has the halo) is that it is too big! i like big, but we don''t want it to be gaudy big - so i am all set on the 1.31. However, i was reading about this thing called "shrinkage" -- and how even tho now it may seem big, in time it''ll be just right (and give it enough time, it''ll be too small!) should my plan be to get the bigger one knowing that in time, this shrinkage phenomemon will happen?

or should i got for the ever so slightly smalller diamond that may in fact, be the perfect fit (for now)...

man, i read some post out there, and the only sure shrinkage will be my wallet! (for good cause of course)

your opinions appreciated

 

[belle]

does the diamond come with a trade up policy?

 

[AndyRosse]

I would ask her and see what she thinks. Let her know that many women do suffer from this "shrinkage" problem LOL.

Also a trade up policy as Belle mentioned would be great too!

 

[FireGoddess]

I find that "it''s too big!" feeling goes away reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllll quick once the ring is on the finger for a few days.....

 

[qtiekiki]

Shrinkage syndrome is very common. Although if I don''t wear my ring a few days, then it looks bigger when I put it back on. I don''t really get when people say that since there might be the shrinkage issue then you should just get a larger diamond to begin with. To me, if you start with a larger stone and catch shrinkage syndrome, then you have to get an even bigger stone. If you start with a smaller stone, then your upgrade might not be as big. I guess some think that if you start with a larger stone then you will catch shrinkage later, but I don''t think that''s always the case. That''s just how I think.

 

[CdnBlingGal]

Keep her away from PS!!! LOL! This is where my DSS started.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Date: 1/12/2006 6:31:04 PM
Author: qtiekiki
Shrinkage syndrome is very common. Although if I don''t wear my ring a few days, then it looks bigger when I put it back on. I don''t really get when people say that since there might be the shrinkage issue then you should just get a larger diamond to begin with. To me, if you start with a larger stone and catch shrinkage syndrome, then you have to get an even bigger stone. If you start with a smaller stone, then your upgrade might not be as big. I guess some think that if you start with a larger stone then you will catch shrinkage later, but I don''t think that''s always the case. That''s just how I think.

Never thought of it this way but it makes sense. . . all stones shrink over time!

 

[dtnyc]

Pons-
I think that they are both good sized stones, that being said I think that 1.5 mark is a threshold of sorts. The 1.55 is very solid, and with a halo pave setting it will really look like a rock!

With regards to the setting and this is something to seriously think about - in terms of "upgrading"- it sounds like you have a beautiful custom setting that you have probably spent a lot of time/$$ on, if you upgrade in 5-10 yrs you would have to get a new setting, as I don''t think that a custom halo would be able to accomodate a larger stone- so even if Lockes does have a trade-up policy, you would still be out the money you spent on the setting, unless you decided to put a colored stone of the same size in that setting.

Either way you go it sounds like it''s going to be a beautiful ring that you could be very proud of and it sounds like you have done a lot of research.
I don''t think that 1 grade of color between G-H makes that big of a difference, but I do think that a quarter of a carat in size would- in terms of overall appearance. If the stone is eye-clean then I say go for the bigger one.

Can I ask if you live in NYC? I feel that by New York standards gaudy big is upwards of 3-4 carats- also with an asscher, I think it would be really tough for it to look gaudy. I feel like I see the biggest rings on the subway, bus, shopping etc. I always joke that Manhattan is the land of small apartments and big diamonds!

 

[pons]

you guessed it, i do live in NYC. you definitely are right, 1.5 or so is not considered ''big'' in nyc. however, this particular ring does have the Halo which definitely adds to it.

yeah, it''s a tough call, sure the 1.31 is a slighty better diamond, but the only thing that scares me is that in a couple months/ years etc saying, ''i could have afforded a bigger diamond''

 

[littlelysser]

I have a 1.57 asscher cut, I color in a halo. We just got engaged last month. It is a good sized stone, but by no means is it gaudy or huge. It is a nice sized rock...

I'll bump the thread so you can see it in SMTR, but it really isn't huge...It is titled My Asscher Ering

Lyss

 

[mrssalvo]

well, most around here will say go for the bigger diamond myself included. If you like it and it''s eye clean, why not? 1.5 asscher faces up smaller than a 1.5 round so you''ve already lost some visual size difference there. Adding the halo will help add it back. My best friend wears a size 6 and has a 1.8 cushion with a halo. At first we all were amazed and impressed by the sparkle that covered her finger. Now, 1 year later it looks normal and doesn''t seem too big at all.

 

[rosy]

Date: 1/12/2006 6:31:04 PM
Author: qtiekiki
Shrinkage syndrome is very common. Although if I don''t wear my ring a few days, then it looks bigger when I put it back on. I don''t really get when people say that since there might be the shrinkage issue then you should just get a larger diamond to begin with. To me, if you start with a larger stone and catch shrinkage syndrome, then you have to get an even bigger stone. If you start with a smaller stone, then your upgrade might not be as big. I guess some think that if you start with a larger stone then you will catch shrinkage later, but I don''t think that''s always the case. That''s just how I think.

I disagree. I don''t think just because you start with a large stone, like a 2 carat you''ll want a 3 carat, then a 4, than a 5, etc. I think once you''ve hit the point where everytime you look down at your diamond & you think to yourself, "it''s huge" that''s when you''ll no longer have diamond shrinkage syndrome. Of course it depends on your finger size, hand size, length of finger, diamond shape, etc but generally for most people it''s around the 2-3 carat mark.

 

[MissCongeniality]

holy crap that is an amazing ring!!!

hint hint to my boyfriend the asscher with the halo and two wedding bands is something I''d want! Lockes diamantaires has all the stuff I love!!! Your selections reek of taste, its like mine

Your girlfriend is lucky to be getting such a beautiful ring! I''d go with the stone that speaks to you the most.



sorry to get carried away....

 

[qtiekiki]

Date: 1/13/2006 12:38:45 AM
Author: rosy

Date: 1/12/2006 6:31:04 PM
Author: qtiekiki
Shrinkage syndrome is very common. Although if I don't wear my ring a few days, then it looks bigger when I put it back on. I don't really get when people say that since there might be the shrinkage issue then you should just get a larger diamond to begin with. To me, if you start with a larger stone and catch shrinkage syndrome, then you have to get an even bigger stone. If you start with a smaller stone, then your upgrade might not be as big. I guess some think that if you start with a larger stone then you will catch shrinkage later, but I don't think that's always the case. That's just how I think.

I disagree. I don't think just because you start with a large stone, like a 2 carat you'll want a 3 carat, then a 4, than a 5, etc. I think once you've hit the point where everytime you look down at your diamond & you think to yourself, 'it's huge' that's when you'll no longer have diamond shrinkage syndrome. Of course it depends on your finger size, hand size, length of finger, diamond shape, etc but generally for most people it's around the 2-3 carat mark.

I agree with you. I was thinking about people who have 1ct - right below 2 ct since that's what the thread was about and usually most threads about shrinkage. I am sure there is a point when enough is enough and you hit the sweet spot, and we had heard about that on this site. But I just wasn't thinking in those numbers. It seems very often with under 2ct + that you will more likely catch the shrinkage. Of course I am not saying that it's 100% true, but I just have a different view than some.

 

[msdarlinjoy]

Hi Pons!

Beautiful setting! I have seen that setting before, and just drool from afar, it is way out of my budget!!

Shrinkage ... Hmmm, Well ... Not every woman will be lucky enough to have a custom made ring with an asscher and halo ... ect! Once you give it to her and pick her up off the floor make sure she is still consious, etc., she will probably the thankful for not only how gorgeous it is, but all the time and effort you put into picking it all out!

The stone you have picked out sounds absolutely fabulous!! Not every woman will go thru what they call "Shrinkage", however some do. Grass is always greener across the fence type thing. Some of us want more, some of us don''t. You will know your lovely lady better than us here.

I say, #1 Pick the diamond that sings to you the best visually. If they both sing to you, and you can realistically afford it, #2 chose the bigger one, and put your mind to rest. You won''t wonder and keep thinking to yourself, "Should I have ...".

As it was mentioned earlier, if down the road, you want to get here something bigger, you could put the original diamond in a lovely pendent for her, put a lovely gemstone in the original ring, and get her something brand spankin'' new, bigger ... whatever you wish.

I do think that if any woman had their choice and didn''t have to consider "price" as a factor ... I think any woman would choose the biggest, best diamond possible. I could be way wrong though!

Wishing you happiness and best wishes! Keep us updated.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I would get the larger stone. If the SI1 is eyeclean which you said it was. VVS is an overkill IMHO even for step cuts. There are times I look at my diamond and think "whoa, it is huge" and other times I think "hmm...I could like a larger stone someday..." It goes back and forth.

 

[singer]

Just my opinion...I think Littlelysser''s asscher halo looks a little too large (although it is very beautiful). I live in the Midwest though, and people here would probably take a second look at a ring like that and think it was fake. I would go with the smaller stone. The size difference between the two isn''t really that much for an asscher and the halo is going to make it look huge. Is your girlfriend a flashy person or more traditional? That might answer your question

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I definitely agree that it depends on where you live, what her style is, and what her friends have. When I got engaged in college, most of my friends were getting diamonds from .75 to 1.0 ct. Mine was 1 ct. and I have been happy with it for 29 years. Most of my current friends have diamonds that size or smaller. But I do love diamonds and now would like to have a 1.5 to last the next 30 years! I would not feel comfortable wearing 2 cts or more in our small town. Yet my sister who lives in a larger city has more friends with larger diamonds. It would not be uncomfortable there!

 

[MissAva]

I would go with the bigger one, as a halo would make it very hard to upgrade.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 1/12/2006 10:03:17 PM
Author: littlelysser
I have a 1.57 asscher cut, I color in a halo. We just got engaged last month. It is a good sized stone, but by no means is it gaudy or huge. It is a nice sized rock...

I''ll bump the thread so you can see it in SMTR, but it really isn''t huge...It is titled My Asscher Ering

Lyss

Your ring is SPECTACULAR and unique, how did I miss THAT!!! No way is it too big or gaudy, perfect and gorgeous! Enjoy!

Good luck Pons, a little extra size is a good thing IMO!

 

[blueroses]

HOLY MOTHER OF STEP-CUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ok, that is a stunning setting. I am a HUGE asscher/pave/halo whore and I have to admit, for all of my ring stalking, I have NEVER seen a setting like that which combines pave and baguettes (or are they mini-traps?!) in the halo!! I've seen one or the other, but never that cool mix of both that yours has. AWESOME!!!

I have to agree with the masses: the difference between a G and H (since you've seen them in person) isn't going to be huge, and VVS2 is overkill IMHO. GO FOR THE 1.55!! That said, if the 1.31 "sings" to you, there isn't a wrong answer. But, having spent 4 years in Manhattan and loving the bling, I think that shrinkage is indeed a risk. I don't think you can go wrong either way, but I'd go for the larger stone.

WHOA, is that thing pretty!! Well done!!

 

[Kaleigh]

Wow, you know I love it!!! I''d go for the bigger one too.

 

[crafftygrrl]

That setting kicks Assch!!!!! (I couldn''t resist the pun.)

P.S. I''d go for the bigger diamond, too. But I live in the D.C. area, so would be plenty of big bling around to keep it company.

You have marvelous taste by the way.

 

[littlelysser]

Thanks Lorelei. I''m very happy with it.

It is good sized, but I''ve never felt uncomfortable with it. I also think it is of a size that I won''t want to upgrade it at any point in the future. T

And I do think it would be very difficult to upgrade with a halo.


That having been said, I live in the east and my bling has good company too~

btw, Pons, that halo is fabulous.

 

[pons]

Thanks all for your help. I''m stuck at work right now, and this is how i spend my break!

anyway, i am definitely leaning towards the 1.55 - even her cousin and her husband said so! (the the husband told me that regardless i should still expect an upgrade in a few years or so)

anyway, yeah, that setting is awesome, and yes, those are baguettes on the corners. However, i am definitely paying a premium -- the setting is >4k! but i figure, i (we) really like it - i''ve seen it several times and i am definitely impressed with the quality, so i think it''s worth it.

the next big question ship it to new jersey and pick it up somewhere (can i ship it to the fed ex delivery center?) and save tax or pick it up in store and drop > 1K on tax!

working on a saturday night sucks

thanks again all

 

[dtnyc]

Pons- do you have any friends or family that could accept the package for you in NJ? or do you know of an appraiser in NJ that you could have it shipped to?
I live in NYC, my ''rents live in Md, our wedding bands are being shipped to MD, and hopefully the tax birds aren''t watching, but our jeweler said we could pick it up and he would just ship CZ''s to my parents if we wanted, so a ring was actually shipped there- it''s a little sketchy, but he was like you can spend the 8.75% better than albany.

 

[february2003bride]

Any ct. size with a halo will seem bigger and no, I don''t think you can interchange a larger diamond into the same halo setting. That being said, what size did your FI like more? When I first got my e-ring it felt huge and its "only" a 1.08! I even called Blue Nile to see if we could exchange it for a .75 but DH convinced me to keep the 1.08 I currently had. It wasn''t until I found PriceScope did diamond shrinkage set in. So, as long as you keep your FI away from here, shrinkage shouldn''t be a problem

Carrie

 

[february2003bride]

Ohmigod Blue Roses- I ADORE that halo!! I''m a solitare gal through and through but that halo is to die for!

Carrie

 

[CoutureFemme]

Oh Pons, I ADORE that asscher halo setting! It is indeed unique! 1.55 isn''t all that large over here in San Francisco (I have a 1.52 pear) but with a halo, I think it would look SO perfect! Please keep us updated on your important decision!