1.31 ct Round, what do we think

[parkranger12]

Its a 1.31 ct Round Brilliant, 6.90 - 6.97 x 4.34mm, G, VS1, Cut; very good, polish: very good, symmetry: very good, fluorescence: none. GIA certified, 59% table, looks like 62.6% depth...THANKS!! opinions please

 

[stone-cold11]

What is the GIA report number?

Is it possible to get an Idealscope image from the vendor of this stone?

 

[parkranger12]

number is 6107803932

 

[stone-cold11]

Not liking the numbers.

http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=6107803932&weight=1.31

It has a thick in the girdle variation, will result in the stone having a smaller face up dimension. An ideally cut stone of 1.31c should have a diameter of 7.06mm not the 6.90mm of this stone.

Also, the angles are not working well together, will probably leak light through the pavilion of the stone, making it look dull.

A 6.9mm is the ideal diameter for a 1.2c stone, so in effect you are paying more for the weight to get a similar face up diameter and the weight is making your stone look bad. So not recommended.

 

[jet2ks]

Ditto StoneCold. You can do better.

 

[parkranger12]

So is it a bad stone? Or is it a good stone, but there are "amayzing" stones out there. I value your opinions greatly!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/28/2009 10:03:27 PM
Author: parkranger12
So is it a bad stone? Or is it a good stone, but there are ''amayzing'' stones out there. I value your opinions greatly!

Thritto the gentlemen above, it is a bit deep but more importantly it is what we call a steep deep, the crown and pavilion angles are not a good fit and there is a very good chance this diamond will leak light, not what you want. I would look for some others.

 

[Ellen]

In agreement with the folks above, you can do better.

Try using this to weed out the bad ones.