Rough CADs - Thinner or Thicker Shank?! Please help!

[lothian110]

I'm getting a customized version of the Elena setting from WF (link for those who don't know what it looks like - http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/elena-diamond-engagement-ring-1363.htm).

The specs of my center stone are as follows: RB 2.04ct G ACA 8.13-8.15 X 5.01mm
Her ring size is 4.5

Obvisouly these CADs don't show the diamonds which will only be on the shank. The difference between the two CADs is the thickness of the shank. Initially I had request 2.8mm width because I had got a suggestion of 2.5-3.0mm from jewelry rep who asked the production manager. The designer came back saying my melee would need to be larger for 2.8mm and I would be charged additional.

Instead, the designer is suggesting going with 2.3mm (the left CAD) vs the 2.6mm or 2.8mm (not sure which he used). The designer suggested 2.3mm because he thinks a narrower shank helps to make the overall design less bulky, and he says that the extra thickness is not necessary with the cathedral. He also says that the recommendation I got from the production manager is usually for ring designs that do not have a substantial cathedral swoop upward, or no swoop at all. He said that the cathedral swoop in this ring adds a lot of structural integrity and it also adds a lot of visual bulk to the design that helps to offset the narrow-ness of the shank

My GF was concerned about the ring being too "dainty" looking. Or like a ring pop, with a large stone and a very narrow band.

What do you think? What thickness should I choose considering the size of her finger and the center stone?!

Please help!

 

[slg47]

I think ~2.5 mm is a good thickness (so maybe the 2.6 option). does she plan to wear a wedding band with it? if so then you don't want to go too thick because with 2 bands it could get rather thick. the width of the band also depends more on how long her fingers are than the size.

also, if you are not getting the diamonds on the prongs, may I suggest 'swoopier' prongs (like on the 'Caroline Pave' ring by Vatche) as opposed to the straight prongs of the Elena setting? just my personal preference

 

[lovemybling]

MY preference would be the 2.3 I think it makes the stone you chose stand out more. I don't think it will be a danity as she think. Espcially with her small finger size.

good Luck

 

[lothian110]

her finger are short. overall, her hands are very small... they certainly are NOT thin and long.

She is planning on wearing the wedding band with the e-ring. In fact, one thing we discussed and I've built into this design is the ability to bring the wedding band nearly flush with the setting.

Is the difference between a 2.3 or 2.5 noticable in person?

I was considering the swoopier style prongs, but I am not sure about them...

 

[slg47]

ok if she has short fingers then maybe go with the 2.3 so she would have 'room' for a band? it just depends on her preference...can you maybe take her to try some rings on, or enlist a friend of hers to help?

 

[lothian110]

I've taken her to get an idea of what she likes. my idea here was to kind of smash together the tiffany novo and tiffany round brilliant with sqaure channel set. she tried one on similiar to what I am desiginng and seemed to like it. I 'think' that setting she liked was about 2.5mm, but I am not 100% sure. I must have gotten that number from somewhere!

 

[TwinkleStar]

What kind of pave did you decide on? Was it like the one in the picture or more of a channel set?

We've had some horror stories recently on the durability of pave rings, even when you're super careful, although to be fair, people were posting more in the <2mm range. With a channel set, it seems like there would be more metal supporting the melee diamonds, so either 2.3mm (or 2.2) or bigger channel set would be more structurally sound than say a 2.3mm with fishtail/v-cut pave that cuts into the metal on the sides to minimize the look of the metal.

Personally, I like the 2.3mm option! But it's still good to keep in mind how to balance the look you want with the structural integrity of the setting.

 

[lothian110]

It would be the same as pictured in the Elena, fishtale pave.

 

[TwinkleStar]

Maybe take her to try on different width sizes and see what she prefers or if it's even noticeable? The 2.5mm is still pretty thin but there will be more metal support for the pave. If she prefers the 2.3mm, go with that.

 

[hoofbeats95]

I'm going to chime in and say that I don't think you will even notice the difference between the two sizes you mentioned. You may just be splitting hairs. With a 4.5 finger how much of the band will be visible outside of that 2 carat rock? That's a serious question because I don't have a tiny finger or a big rock! lol

The rings you mentioned above - the tiffany rings that you are trying to merge together - are those sidestones pave set? I ask because if she said she liked something that wasn't pave set she may not like the pave. Just a thought that popped out to me. Ignore me if you like.

 

[lothian110]

I'm not concerned about the pave, I know she likes it.
She was unsure between pave or channel. I made that decision for her!

To be clear, the CADs show 2.3mm vs 2.8mm.
You can definitely tell the difference in the CAD.
I'm having him give me a requote for 2.5mm taking everyones advice and my gf's wishes into consideration.

You think that will be sufficient?

 

[hoofbeats95]

I think 2.5 is a PERFECT size.

Good about the pave. Just thought I'd ask as I tried to find the other rings you mentioned but wasn't sure I knew which ones they were. I find pave uncomfortable to wear daily and I worry about the ease of losing a stone. So I thought I'd double check. Looks like you are well on your way to a rocking ring!

 

[slg47]

I think it sounds great do you plan to get a 2.5 mm matching band as well?

 

[lothian110]

i don't plan on getting it yet. I was planning on getting it after proposing, with her input on what she would like.
I would imagine that she would want the matching band, and if so, I would get it the same 2.5mm width.

I also customized my platinum mix for this e-ring.. went with the recommendation of 90%plat/10% iridium, so I would probably request that for the band also.

thanks for all the input! any other advice or opinions on these CADs is surely appreciated!

 

[hoofbeats95]

Can I ask how you decided on the platinum mix?