|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » 1.52 carat?
|
|
 |
1.52 carat? |
 |
| P: 7/1/2004 11:02:45 AM | |
booda Rough Rock Total Posts: 5 Last Post: 7/1/2004 Member Since: 6/29/2004 |
these are the dimensions for a princess cut i recently purchased: 6.06 X 5.97 X 4.82 mm, 80.7% (depth) and 73% (table) according to the GIA certificate, it is 1.52 carats. does this seem right to you? all the other diamond dimensions i have looked at of this carat weight seem to have bigger dimensions.
|
| Posted: 7/1/2004 11:02:45 AM | |
|
There are 5 replies to this message. There are 5 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 7/1/2004 11:20:14 AM | |
moremoremore Ideal Rock Total Posts: 6,825 Last Post: 2/9/2009 Member Since: 3/15/2004 |
It's because your stone is outrageously deep...it's bottom heavy.... Sorry 
______________________________ Stewart says: I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggon'it, people like me. |
| Posted: 7/1/2004 11:20:14 AM | |
| P: 7/1/2004 11:23:15 AM | |
|
moremoremore Ideal Rock Total Posts: 6,825 Last Post: 2/9/2009 Member Since: 3/15/2004 |
It's the same size as this 1.27, which has good measurements....sorry http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail.cfm?did=6965679 It's just a shame to pay the premium on a 1.5 stone, when you could have gotten the same size from a smaller and cheaper stone...But if you love it, that's all that matters! 
______________________________ Stewart says: I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggon'it, people like me. |
| Posted: 7/1/2004 11:23:15 AM | |
| P: 7/1/2004 1:00:18 PM | |
researcher Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,440 Last Post: 5/26/2008 Member Since: 4/27/2004 |
A stone with a carat weight of 1.52 should have an average diameter of about 6.44mm. Your stone is extremely deep as MMM stated (it's suggested that you don't go over 75% for depth). Also, your ideal table (for the depth of your stone) should be somewhere around 76-77, not 73%. However, a 73% table is still in a good cut class so you don't have to worry much about it (a large table usually means the stone will reflect more white light, less fire). You may have a decent stone in terms of performance (I'd need all the specs and an ideal scope image to judge that), but you definitely paid for the appearance of a well cut stone in the 1.2-1.3 ct range as MMM suggested.
|
| Posted: 7/1/2004 1:00:18 PM | |
| P: 7/1/2004 1:11:17 PM | |
|
researcher Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,440 Last Post: 5/26/2008 Member Since: 4/27/2004 |
BTW, numbers just lead you in the right direction for a stone, letting you know whether you're on the right track. But, there are always exceptions to every rule when it comes to diamonds! Your stone may perform a lot better than others because your angles compliment one another and really allow the light to dance. So, please don't read these posts thinking your eyes deceived you or anything! My stone also faces up a bit small (I have a depth of 74.1%), but I was willing to deal with it because my stone is so amazing!
|
| Posted: 7/1/2004 1:11:17 PM | |
| P: 7/1/2004 1:19:21 PM | |
|
booda Rough Rock Total Posts: 5 Last Post: 7/1/2004 Member Since: 6/29/2004 |
thanks for all the responses. this was my first diamond purchase and i guess i kind of rushed it...should have researched a lot more before impulsively buying the first dazzling stone. again, thanks for all your input!
|
| Posted: 7/1/2004 1:19:21 PM | |
 Previous Page
|
Next Page 
|
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
| |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives
