2 diamonds - need help deciding.

[goodys4me]

Please help me decide. I have 2 diamonds that I'm considering. Aside from price & carat weight, I'd like to know which one is better quality, or at least offers the better value. I put the specs through HCA & they're both 1.3. The table on the second one is slight bigger, but I don't know how much of a difference that makes. If there's any other info I should add, please let me know. Also, these are both from the same online vendor so I'm not able to see the diamond up close & personal. If I don't go with either of these, I'll probably end up at Tiffany, but would love to hear feedback. Thank you!

Cut: AGS Ideal 0
Size: 1.91
VS1/F
Table: 54.8%
Depth: 62.4%
Crown Angle: 34.9
Pavilion Angle: 40.7
Girdle; Thin to Medium
Fluor: Negligible
$28,969

Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal (GIA cert)
Size: 2.01
VS2/F
Table: 56%
Depth: 62.2%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Girdle: Med. to Slightly Thick
Fluor: None
$34,554

 

[dockman3]

Personally, I''d go with the second one. The first one is right on the border of "ideal" cut while the second one is safely within the region. The slightly larger table is not a problem at all. Do you have links to these diamonds or any pictures? That might help us too. But just from these numbers, I''d say the second. I see that it happens to be 5k more, but you''re paying a lot for getting over the 2ct mark and it is a slightly better cut, IMO. The VS2 should be safe, so you needn''t worry about that. They''re both great, but I''d have to say number 2.

 

[goodys4me]

Here are the links (I hope they work). The first one is the 1.91 and the second one is the 2.01.

http://www.jamesallen.com/grading_report.asp?pic=1131275&type=2

http://www.jamesallen.com/grading_report.asp?pic=1182538&type=2

 

[dockman3]

After looking at those, I would DEFINITELY go with the second one. The symmetry in the first is not good and would drive me crazy looking at it. The second diamond is much easier on the eyes and looks like a great stone!

 

[goodys4me]

Thanks, dockman! I know what you mean about the symmetry; I think it would drive me crazy, too. Is girdle thickness anything to be concerned about since the second one is medium to slightly thick vs. thin to medium for the first? In the end though, do you think it''s definitely worth the premium price?

 

[dockman3]

Actually, md-sl thick is preferred. It helps protect the diamond a little bit from being chipped when hit on something. And yes, it would be worth the extra money to me. If you''re already spending that much money, what''s a little bit more to get something that is really great?! You can wait and get a second opinion if you want, but that second one looks fantastic to me!

 

[Lorelei]

These are both very fine diamonds of excellent cut, you could pick either and be quite happy I am sure, but it depends on your budget etc as to which might be the best choice for you as there is a difference between the prices. Incidentally the girdles are fine on each - no worries. The images are greatly enlarged so concerning the optical symmetry of each diamond, it isn't something you may probably notice much in real life anyway, you will only see arrows in some lighting conditions and they look more silvery than dark mostly. Do you have Idealscope images?

 

[honey22]

The girldes are totally fine. You are not really going to have that much more chance of chipping a RB with those girdles. You are more likely to have chipping in square cuts, or settings with exposed girdles.

One of those stones set in a 6 prong setting for example would be totally fine.

Either stones could be promising, do you have IS images to confirm either stone? If not, I personnaly prefer the AGS cert (especially if it scores 0 for light performance). Bear in mind the GIA rounds their crown and pavillion angles, so the stones may be closer than you think.