1.8 to 2.0 ct, Help me narrow down the 6 options please

[Julyisjuly]

Hello!
Hope you are having a wonderful weekend.

It's my second time come here to ask for help, you guys here are so sweet, helpful and informative. Really appreciate you guys tell me to run away from a bad cut diamond from a local store last time.

Budget: try to keep under 25k after setting

Currently I have 6 options from WF:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-di...49786,4015037,4049800,4037189,4016765,3905126

I likes this simple setting after browse a bit, it is very thin, may help my stone looks bigger.
https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...-solitaire-engagement-ring-by-vatche-1613.htm

Please help me narrow down these stones I posted here, and let me know do you think the setting will look great with the stone?

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'll take the 1.94ct G VS2. A well cut stone in this weight doesn't grow on trees.

 

[crbl999]

I like the 1.94 also. Great proportions and excellent ASET.

 

[Julyisjuly]

I'll take the 1.94ct G VS2. A well cut stone in this weight doesn't grow on trees.

Thank you so much!

 

[Julyisjuly]

I like the 1.94 also. Great proportions and excellent ASET.

glad to see two experts agree to the same rock! Appreciate your help~

 

[Johnbt]

I'm certainly not an expert, but I also liked the 1.94 the most. When I looked more closely at the specs I realized they were sort of familiar. We bought a similar WF diamond in April, although it was smaller at 1.51. (And we are still completely happy with it.)

Ours - followed by the 1.94 specs.

Depth % 61.6 - 61.5
Table % 55.9 - 55.8
Crown Angle 34.6 - 34.5
Star 49.0 - 50.0
Pavilion Angle 40.7 - 40.8
Crown % 15.2 - 15.2
Lower Girdle % 78.0 - 77.0

And the Vatche setting should work out perfectly. We got the Vatche U-113 6-prong.

 

[tyty333]

I like the 1.94 too. It hits the 8mm mark. For me however, I* would probably go with the 1.876 because I dont think I* would see enough size difference
to make it worth paying the extra $1500 but if the money isnt a big deal go for the 8mm 1.94.

 

[benjw]

I'm no expert, but I would go for the 1.876c. The specs are very similar to the 1.94c and you're sacrificing only 0.064c to save over $1,000.

Also note that the setting you chose only accommodates center stones up to 1.99 carats.

 

[sledge]

Another vote for the 1.94ct. It's a unicorn because of it's weight and being super ideal and the proportions are just lovely!

FYI, the smaller the table the larger the upper facets which means more fire! This one has the smallest table of the group. Plus the angles are very, very complimentary at 34.5/40.8! Remember, the Tolk with perfect proportions has a 34.5 crown & 40.75 pavilion. Look at the videos and I think you will see how this one has that edge.

Please pull the trigger already, lol.

 

[Julyisjuly]

I'm certainly not an expert, but I also liked the 1.94 the most. When I looked more closely at the specs I realized they were sort of familiar. We bought a similar WF diamond in April, although it was smaller at 1.51. (And we are still completely happy with it.)

Ours - followed by the 1.94 specs.

Depth % 61.6 - 61.5
Table % 55.9 - 55.8
Crown Angle 34.6 - 34.5
Star 49.0 - 50.0
Pavilion Angle 40.7 - 40.8
Crown % 15.2 - 15.2
Lower Girdle % 78.0 - 77.0

And the Vatche setting should work out perfectly. We got the Vatche U-113 6-prong.

Nice, Your Vatche U-113 setting is beautiful and timeless.
Make me think whether the setting i picked makes my stone look cheap? Since the band is pretty thin...

 

[Julyisjuly]

Another vote for the 1.94ct. It's a unicorn because of it's weight and being super ideal and the proportions are just lovely!

FYI, the smaller the table the larger the upper facets which means more fire! This one has the smallest table of the group. Plus the angles are very, very complimentary at 34.5/40.8! Remember, the Tolk with perfect proportions has a 34.5 crown & 40.75 pavilion. Look at the videos and I think you will see how this one has that edge.

Please pull the trigger already, lol.

Thank you again, Sledge!
BTW, in terms of the clarity, do you think the additional Clouds not shown is a concern?
any chance get milky diamond?

 

[Julyisjuly]

I'm no expert, but I would go for the 1.876c. The specs are very similar to the 1.94c and you're sacrificing only 0.064c to save over $1,000.

Also note that the setting you chose only accommodates center stones up to 1.99 carats.

Thank you Benjw!
Thanks for reminding me of the setting.
I like the setting since it's 6 prongs, more secure than 4 prongs.
And the side metal doesn't cover the stone too much, so more lights will get through make it sparkle.

But the band is pretty thin, don't know whether gonna make my ring looks cheaper than it is.

 

[Johnbt]

I like the band you picked.

"Since the band is pretty thin..."

I'm all for a minimal band. For me the diamond is the focus. Think of it this way... a thin ring makes the diamond look even larger. And when the diamond is large to start with...

Now, if you're rough on things, maybe a slightly wider ring might be good. Ask WF if it might be a problem; they do this every day.

 

[sledge]

Thank you again, Sledge!
BTW, in terms of the clarity, do you think the additional Clouds not shown is a concern?
any chance get milky diamond?

You're very welcome!

Nah, I think you are in the clear on this one. It's a VS2 which generally means you will avoid issues like that. Where it becomes more of a concern is when the grade setting inclusion is a cloud and it has that same note to the side. Or if you see one where the plot looks really clean and the notes say "clarity is based on clouds not shown".

But that isn't the case here. Regardless, one of the luxuries of buying from a quality vendor like WF is that they keep their stones in-stock in their vault in Houston. Ask them to pull the stone and confirm there are no issues. They will take individual pictures, videos, etc to help give you the warm fuzzies. Also, if you are between a few stones you can ask them to pull those too and do a comparison review using their expert gemologists to gain additional insight.

As far as the setting, I woudn't worry to much. You are staying within the thresholds and when you place the order WF will submit the exact diamond measurements to Vatche who will then adjust the setting to fit your stone perfectly.

Generally speaking there is some concern about getting bands below 1.75mm width. I see this one is 1.65mm but being Vatche I worry less about it. I did notice for a mere $270 you can upgrade to platinum and for the small cost I personally think that's a no brainer. Only thing I saw you may not like (as some people do not) is the matching wedding band curves around the basket portion of the e-ring. It doesn't look bad, but just making you aware as I've heard others complain.

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...che-1513-felicity-wedding-set-3694.htm#size=6

 

[benjw]

Thank you again, Sledge!
BTW, in terms of the clarity, do you think the additional Clouds not shown is a concern?
any chance get milky diamond?

This is a VS2 diamond (and eye clean), so I don't think you'll notice any of the inclusions with the naked eye. I personally only care about what the naked eye can perceive, so I personally am okay with VS1 and better.

You can ask WhiteFlash to take a side-by-side photo of all the diamonds you're currently considering. I bought from them very recently and found out they offer that kind of help.

 

[benjw]

Thank you Benjw!
Thanks for reminding me of the setting.
I like the setting since it's 6 prongs, more secure than 4 prongs.
And the side metal doesn't cover the stone too much, so more lights will get through make it sparkle.

But the band is pretty thin, don't know whether gonna make my ring looks cheaper than it is.

IMO, the thin band makes it look very elegant. It would also match someone with a thin finger.
I second what another poster said. Get the upgrade to platinum since it doesn't cost much more and offers another layer of security against breaking (although I doubt this will happen).

 

[SimoneDi]

@Julyisjuly I also like the 1.94ct stone. It reaches 8mm so it’s a great way to obtain the 2ct look without paying the premium.

I will only make a comment about the setting; please don’t get the felicity. It is literally one of the most (if not the most) uncomfortable settings ever made and because it is so very thin, it actually makes the diamond look smaller. If you like the style, get the Venus https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...tche-venus-solitaire-engagement-ring-2378.htm

It is the same style but sturdier and much, much more comfortable. That’s my 2c.

 

[sledge]

@Julyisjuly I also like the 1.94ct stone. It reaches 8mm so it’s a great way to obtain the 2ct look without paying the premium.

I will only make a comment about the setting; please don’t get the felicity. It is literally one of the most (if not the most) uncomfortable settings ever made and because it is so very thin, it actually makes the diamond look smaller. If you like the style, get the Venus https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...tche-venus-solitaire-engagement-ring-2378.htm

It is the same style but sturdier and much, much more comfortable. That’s my 2c.

@SimoneDi, do you know if they make the Venus in a 6-prong? I think one of the reasons the OP liked the other one was because it had a 6-prong setup. Price is much nicer on this BTW.

 

[Julyisjuly]

I like the band you picked.

"Since the band is pretty thin..."

I'm all for a minimal band. For me the diamond is the focus. Think of it this way... a thin ring makes the diamond look even larger. And when the diamond is large to start with...

Now, if you're rough on things, maybe a slightly wider ring might be good. Ask WF if it might be a problem; they do this every day.

Thanks, will ask WF for more detail.

 

[Julyisjuly]

You're very welcome!

Nah, I think you are in the clear on this one. It's a VS2 which generally means you will avoid issues like that. Where it becomes more of a concern is when the grade setting inclusion is a cloud and it has that same note to the side. Or if you see one where the plot looks really clean and the notes say "clarity is based on clouds not shown".

But that isn't the case here. Regardless, one of the luxuries of buying from a quality vendor like WF is that they keep their stones in-stock in their vault in Houston. Ask them to pull the stone and confirm there are no issues. They will take individual pictures, videos, etc to help give you the warm fuzzies. Also, if you are between a few stones you can ask them to pull those too and do a comparison review using their expert gemologists to gain additional insight.

As far as the setting, I woudn't worry to much. You are staying within the thresholds and when you place the order WF will submit the exact diamond measurements to Vatche who will then adjust the setting to fit your stone perfectly.

Generally speaking there is some concern about getting bands below 1.75mm width. I see this one is 1.65mm but being Vatche I worry less about it. I did notice for a mere $270 you can upgrade to platinum and for the small cost I personally think that's a no brainer. Only thing I saw you may not like (as some people do not) is the matching wedding band curves around the basket portion of the e-ring. It doesn't look bad, but just making you aware as I've heard others complain.

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...che-1513-felicity-wedding-set-3694.htm#size=6

That's a great point, i see the mini curved point.
maybe I can get ring first, and with the ring and go to local stores to figure out a fitting wedding band.
I imagine the following Tiffany style will fit well.

 

[Julyisjuly]

@SimoneDi, do you know if they make the Venus in a 6-prong? I think one of the reasons the OP liked the other one was because it had a 6-prong setup. Price is much nicer on this BTW.

Yup yup, Sledge is reading my mind now. I do prefer a 6 prong, personally feel it more secure.

I have a size 5-5.5 finger, given I am not a tall girl, 5.4 tall LOL

I purchased a Tiffany ring a couple years ago, not for engagement, the band width looks great. However, the knife band is not very comfortable. I emailed Tiffany customer service, i guess they will tell me the band is 2mm. If so, I may find a 2mm width band on WF.

I will ask WF whether they can customize the Venus style into 6 prongs,
or make the felicity a bit wider, sturdier and more comfortable.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I like the 1.94, but some people like the idea of a stone being 2 cts, and that might be a reason to go ahead and choose the 2 ct stone. Both are beautiful stones!

That Felicity setting is much too thin for a diamond this size (or any size, for me). I'd go with one of the other 6 prong settings such as these:

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...-solitaire-engagement-ring-by-vatche-1779.htm

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...-knife-edge-solitaire-engagement-ring-713.htm

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...fany-style-solitaire-engagement-ring-3581.htm

https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...half-round-solitaire-engagement-ring-3585.htm

 

[SimoneDi]

@SimoneDi, do you know if they make the Venus in a 6-prong? I think one of the reasons the OP liked the other one was because it had a 6-prong setup. Price is much nicer on this BTW.

I know that Vatche could customize, I don’t see a reason why they would refuse to use a different head.

@Julyisjuly if you thought that the T&Co was thin and uncomfortable, I really don’t think that you would like the felicity, it felt extremely thin and sharp and I personally find T&Co’s knife edge comfortable. We also have the same ring size.

 

[Julyisjuly]

Hi all friends!!
Just saw another option, looks like a great cut, G, 2.06ct, VS2
and $3000 less!!!
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R206-619612Z1Z?utm_source=rarecarat&utm_medium=cpc
any trap could be?

 

[Julyisjuly]

Hi all friends!!
Just saw another option, looks like a great cut, G, 2.06ct, VS2
and $3000 less!!!
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R206-619612Z1Z?utm_source=rarecarat&utm_medium=cpc
any trap could be?

I emailed the website to request, ASSET, Heart and IDEALSCOPE & Videos, they replied me: None of these available as the supplier doesn't have the high tech equipment necessary for that....

 

[sledge]

Hi all friends!!
Just saw another option, looks like a great cut, G, 2.06ct, VS2
and $3000 less!!!
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R206-619612Z1Z?utm_source=rarecarat&utm_medium=cpc
any trap could be?

Remember earlier when I said most VS2's were okay? This might be a case where you need to clarify. FYI, the inclusion listed first (or on top) is what we call the grade setting inclusion. GIA & AGS then continue to list the other inclusions (if any) in order of worst to least magnitude.

So in this particular case, clouds would be the grade setting inclusion. The second worst inclusion on this stone is a crystal. And the one with the least impact is the feather.

What concerns me (even on a VS2 and as I noted earlier) is when you have clouds as the grade setting inclusion AND the "additional clouds not shown" in the notes section. This particular stone has this combo so IMO it warrants a call and verification to confirm there is no hazy/milky/cloudy conditions going on with the stone. I know many people just consider VS2+ to always be okay but while that is true for most stones, it's not true for all them. Since you can't videos, etc. I'd hate for you to gamble on the stone and then find this out AFTER it was delivered to you, and someone else gobbled up the 1.94 from WF.

Otherwise, the proportions on the stone look very promising and IMO worth a gamble if the $3k is a deal breaker. You could always get an ASET, idealscope and H&A viewer and check the stone when it arrives.

The gamble here is that it's not a true H&A stone with the level of precision cutting that the WF stone is. Also, I am not sure how important trade value is to you for the future, but WF has one of the best programs -- simply spend $1 more and get full credit of the original stone. And WF has great inventory for larger upgrades also. So that part is hassle free and completely transparent.

One thing is certain, someone will likely gobble up that 1.94 before you have a chance to ship, inspect and change your mind on the other diamond. If by chance you have the funds to purchase both stones and evaluate at your home and then return whichever you don't like best, that would be a good option too.

One last thought -- the GIA stone has a 57 table. Because of the way GIA rounds & averages, this could be a little less than 57 or a little greater than 57. The AGS certification is more precise in this regard as they use a 3D scan to obtain their measurements. Regardless, that smaller table is going to throw more fire. I'm just not certain if it will throw enough that you will see the difference, or more importantly if you'll see $3k of variance.

 

[sledge]

I know that Vatche could customize, I don’t see a reason why they would refuse to use a different head.

@Julyisjuly if you thought that the T&Co was thin and uncomfortable, I really don’t think that you would like the felicity, it felt extremely thin and sharp and I personally find T&Co’s knife edge comfortable. We also have the same ring size.

I figured Vatche would be willing to do so, and it sounds easy enough. It just sounded like you were familiar with and had/used Vatche in the past.

Funny you ladies talk about the sharpness of the rings. Stuff like that annoys me with simple things like silverware, tools, etc. I don't mind weight, but I hate those sharp edges. Obviously as a guy I don't wear the same type of rings as you do but that other stuff drives me bonkers.

As I recall, WF has a ring that is similar to the classic Tiffany solitaire that they "PS mod" and I thought they smoothed out the knife edge as part of the process. I'm sure WF could just custom make their version of that Vatche and do some mods like that as well. You'd just need to get a quote.

 

[Julyisjuly]

Hi folks!

Updates from Whiteflash, they post a video for me, side-by-side for the 1.87 vs 1.94.

They told me the 1.87 one is the clearer one.

I am following up in terms of fire & sparkle.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Both stones look very clean to me. I'd choose the larger one, 1.94. I can see the size difference. They will both be great in terms of fire and sparkle.

 

[Julyisjuly]

Remember earlier when I said most VS2's were okay? This might be a case where you need to clarify. FYI, the inclusion listed first (or on top) is what we call the grade setting inclusion. GIA & AGS then continue to list the other inclusions (if any) in order of worst to least magnitude.

So in this particular case, clouds would be the grade setting inclusion. The second worst inclusion on this stone is a crystal. And the one with the least impact is the feather.

What concerns me (even on a VS2 and as I noted earlier) is when you have clouds as the grade setting inclusion AND the "additional clouds not shown" in the notes section. This particular stone has this combo so IMO it warrants a call and verification to confirm there is no hazy/milky/cloudy conditions going on with the stone. I know many people just consider VS2+ to always be okay but while that is true for most stones, it's not true for all them. Since you can't videos, etc. I'd hate for you to gamble on the stone and then find this out AFTER it was delivered to you, and someone else gobbled up the 1.94 from WF.

Otherwise, the proportions on the stone look very promising and IMO worth a gamble if the $3k is a deal breaker. You could always get an ASET, idealscope and H&A viewer and check the stone when it arrives.

The gamble here is that it's not a true H&A stone with the level of precision cutting that the WF stone is. Also, I am not sure how important trade value is to you for the future, but WF has one of the best programs -- simply spend $1 more and get full credit of the original stone. And WF has great inventory for larger upgrades also. So that part is hassle free and completely transparent.

One thing is certain, someone will likely gobble up that 1.94 before you have a chance to ship, inspect and change your mind on the other diamond. If by chance you have the funds to purchase both stones and evaluate at your home and then return whichever you don't like best, that would be a good option too.

One last thought -- the GIA stone has a 57 table. Because of the way GIA rounds & averages, this could be a little less than 57 or a little greater than 57. The AGS certification is more precise in this regard as they use a 3D scan to obtain their measurements. Regardless, that smaller table is going to throw more fire. I'm just not certain if it will throw enough that you will see the difference, or more importantly if you'll see $3k of variance.

I totally agree with you, if there is nothing sketchy going on with this 2.06 ct, it would be a much better option. $3000 cheaper and exceeds 2ct. mark!!

However, I told the website "I am really interested in this rock, but how to make any decision without any real pictures, is there anything you can help me? " Instead of answering me correctly, they let me check another option: https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/heirloom/round/search#diamond=R208-5425Z640Z