1.50 G/VS2''s..Which would YOU pick?? Opinions?

[Missrocks]

Hi Everyone,

I have a friend who is debating between these three GIA diamonds. I am really trying to push #3, but he is being swayed otherwise.

1)

1.52ct RBC
G/ VS2
Excellent cut grade
7.45- 7.47 x 4.47mm
Depth- 59.9
Table- 60
Crown- 33.5
Pavilion- 41.0
Girdle- Thin to Medium
Culet- None
Polish/ Symmetry- VG/ VG
Fluor- None

HCA- 1.9

Plot has crystal in center of table, feather, indented natural, and extra facet

$11,960

2)

1.52 RBC
G/VS2
Cut- EX
7.29 - 7.36 x 4.61mm
Depth-62.9
Table- 56
Crown- 35
Pavilion- 41.2
Girdle- Thin to Medium
Culet- None
Polish/ Symmetry- EX/ EX
Fluorescence- None

HCA- 3.6

Plot has one larger crystal in center of table and four smaller in crown facet area

$12,500


3)

1.51 RBC
G/VS2
Cut- VG
Depth- 60.5
Table- 55
Crown- 35.5
Pavilion- 40.4
Girdle- thin to slightly thick
Culet- none
Polish/ Symmetry- VG/ EX
Fluorescence- Medium Blue

HCA- .8

Plot has very small feather in table area and another plotted on pavilion side

$12,500.00


The reason I like #3 best is it read .8 on HCA, much higher than the other two. The combination of angles concurs with many other RBC''s I have seen and loved (maybe just personal pref.) Also the plot looks to be the "cleanest". I know that feathers will always be white. The included crystals in the table areas of #2 and #3 could be dark. I also like stones in the near colorless area with a faint or med. fluor. to whiten them up a bit. I''ve always been set on colorless personally and percieve color very easily.

In my opinion #1- with the combination of that depth and the larger table- won''t have as much fire. I personally don''t like larger tables- I think smaller tables= a more "fiery" diamond. Also I think 36 degrees seems a bit steep for crown, maybe? I also don''t like the indented natural- I know it doesn''t affect the clarity grade b/c you can''t see it face on. But you could see it with a loupe from the side. If I was paying xtra for a VS grade (vs. say an SI1), I would want it to VS from all angles, so to put it.

And #2 is cut too deep. If I wanted a 7.29- 7.36 diameter I could probably get a nicer make in a 1.38- 1.45. Its a bit chunky for my taste, even though GIA gives it XXX. Also doesn''t rate well at all on HCA.

Keep in mind, at this point, he is not open to other suggestions and it will be one of these three. - And I realize there is probably something else better yet out there.

I would just like your opinions if there is something I missed.

Am I crazy for saying its a NO BRAINER for #3??


THANKS IN ADVANCE

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I think your logic is very good.
Watch out for lower girdle length - if it is too short in smaller table, higher crown stones then the center can be dark.
An ideal-scope or even normal photo will show it, or ask the dealer.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You said, "The reason I like #3 best is it read .8 on HCA, much higher than the other two."

But that is not true, is it Garry? My understanding is that any score under 2 was desirable, and many people prefer between 1 and 2. So the lower the number is not necessarily better.

But of those three, I''d definitely eliminate #2 due to the depth and small diameter. I''d really have to see the other two.

 

[Missrocks]

GARRY , Could you clarify this for me, please?? I guess I was under the impression the lower number was better.


And I guess I didn''t make something clear.... The high HCA score wasn''t the ONLY THING that made me like #3 the best. I also liked the "cleaner" looking plot and fluor.
I also don''t like the look of larger tables and #1 had a 60.

 

[chrono]

My understanding is that any HCA score under 2 is great. A stone with a score of 0.5 isn't a better stone than one that scores 2.5 However, many actually prefer stones that score between 1 and 2.

As for the plot, I would not go by the cert plot alone. Some crazy inked ones are actually quite eye clean and sometimes, the clean one is visible. I would need to see the stone. Still, for a VS2, I would guess the stones to be eye clean.

Still, logic tells me that stone 3 is probably nicer. Some might like the 60/60 stone 1 but my personal preference is stone 3.

 

[Missrocks]

I did go back do some more reading. It does say that "stone with 2 HCA may out-perform stones with lower HCA scores".
Thanks for bringing that up. I guess my original understanding was wrong.

But I still don''t personally like 60/60 stones- Agreeing with chrono.

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 1/25/2008 12:57:37 PM
Author: Chrono
My understanding is that any HCA score under 2 is great. A stone with a score of 0.5 isn't a better stone than one that scores 2.5 However, many actually prefer stones that score between 1 and 2.

As for the plot, I would not go by the cert plot alone. Some crazy inked ones are actually quite eye clean and sometimes, the clean one is visible. I would need to see the stone. Still, for a VS2, I would guess the stones to be eye clean.

Still, logic tells me that stone 3 is probably nicer. Some might like the 60/60 stone 1 but my personal preference is stone 3.

Ditto to scores between 0-2 being nice and a tool to weed out bad performers.

Since you said you are open to suggestions, do you like this stone? http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-584858.htm

 

[Missrocks]

Sorry, Skippy. I think you read the post wrong. He is not open to other suggestions.
But thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Shay37]

For all the reasons you listed, and I just like the numbers a teensy bit better, I would also vote for #3.

shay

 

[Missrocks]

Thanks Garry, Chrono, Diamondseeker, Skippy, and Shay for the feedback. Some very good points made.
I was going to show my friend this thread, just for some other opinions, but I think he already made his choice- I'll find out later, but he either got #1 or #2-
Oh, well.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

While I also would probably have chosen #3, I surely hope he chose #1 out of the other two. I''d rather have the 60/60 than the one that is so deep that it looks like a 1.4 ct. stone.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/25/2008 1:27:32 AM
Author:Missrocks
Hi Everyone,

I have a friend who is debating between these three GIA diamonds. I am really trying to push #3, but he is being swayed otherwise.

1)

1.52ct RBC
G/ VS2
Excellent cut grade
7.45- 7.47 x 4.47mm
Depth- 59.9
Table- 60
Crown- 33.5
Pavilion- 41.0
Girdle- Thin to Medium
Culet- None
Polish/ Symmetry- VG/ VG
Fluor- None

HCA- 1.9

Plot has crystal in center of table, feather, indented natural, and extra facet

$11,960

2)

1.52 RBC
G/VS2
Cut- EX
7.29 - 7.36 x 4.61mm
Depth-62.9
Table- 56
Crown- 35
Pavilion- 41.2
Girdle- Thin to Medium
Culet- None
Polish/ Symmetry- EX/ EX
Fluorescence- None

HCA- 3.6

Plot has one larger crystal in center of table and four smaller in crown facet area

$12,500


3)

1.51 RBC
G/VS2
Cut- VG
Depth- 60.5
Table- 55
Crown- 35.5
Pavilion- 40.4
Girdle- thin to slightly thick
Culet- none
Polish/ Symmetry- VG/ EX
Fluorescence- Medium Blue

HCA- .8

Plot has very small feather in table area and another plotted on pavilion side

$12,500.00


The reason I like #3 best is it read .8 on HCA, much higher than the other two. The combination of angles concurs with many other RBC's I have seen and loved (maybe just personal pref.) Also the plot looks to be the 'cleanest'. I know that feathers will always be white. The included crystals in the table areas of #2 and #3 could be dark. I also like stones in the near colorless area with a faint or med. fluor. to whiten them up a bit. I've always been set on colorless personally and percieve color very easily.

In my opinion #1- with the combination of that depth and the larger table- won't have as much fire. I personally don't like larger tables- I think smaller tables= a more 'fiery' diamond. Also I think 36 degrees seems a bit steep for crown, maybe? I also don't like the indented natural- I know it doesn't affect the clarity grade b/c you can't see it face on. But you could see it with a loupe from the side. If I was paying xtra for a VS grade (vs. say an SI1), I would want it to VS from all angles, so to put it.

And #2 is cut too deep. If I wanted a 7.29- 7.36 diameter I could probably get a nicer make in a 1.38- 1.45. Its a bit chunky for my taste, even though GIA gives it XXX. Also doesn't rate well at all on HCA.

Keep in mind, at this point, he is not open to other suggestions and it will be one of these three. - And I realize there is probably something else better yet out there.

I would just like your opinions if there is something I missed.

Am I crazy for saying its a NO BRAINER for #3??


THANKS IN ADVANCE

I like your logic

 

[Missrocks]

Thanks Garry! A compliment from you means a lot.

Still no news on whether it was 1 or 2...