5 stone bands

[orbaya]

I am considering purchasing a platinum 5 stone band from Whiteflash. I'm liking the 1.25ctw, but it's $1265 more than the 1.00ctw. That is a huge price difference, and am wondering if the extra .25 carats will make that much of a visual difference for that amount of money?

I've emailed Lesley to see if she can send me handshots of each size so that I can compare the two. I'm just surprised that the price difference is that much.

eta: I emailed Lesley and she said the the .25's are over 50% more than the .20's.

I didn't know it was that much!

 

[orbaya]

Bump.

Any insight on whether the extra .05cts is enough of a visual difference to justify an extra $1265 between .20 and .25? Thanks!

 

[Sundial]

Personally for that much of a price difference I would go with the smaller band. I don''t think you will see that much of a difference to justify the cost. By the way Orbaya did you decide to keep your Whiteflash bangle???

 

[mercoledi]

I think you''d have to know the average diameter of 0.2 and 0.25 stones I believe I''ve read that most people can''t tell a difference of less than 0.5 mm, and since these stones will already be smallish, I doubt you''ll see that per stone but probably you''ll be able to see a difference in the ring as a whole.

Does anyone know what those diameters might be? Can we do some math?

 

[chickpea]

.2 carat = 3.8 mm
.25 carat = 4.1 mm

here''s a link to the mm to carat conversion chart.

probably not much of a visual difference for the price, IMO

 

[orbaya]

Date: 1/11/2008 3:09:05 PM
Author: Sundial
Personally for that much of a price difference I would go with the smaller band. I don''t think you will see that much of a difference to justify the cost. By the way Orbaya did you decide to keep your Whiteflash bangle???

I''ve been looking at conversion charts online, but it''s still hard to visualize how much bigger the ring look as a whole in the 1.25ctw size.

No, I''ve decided to return the bangle. As much as I love it, I just had too many doubts (my own hangups) for that amount of money. Since I wasn''t 100% sold on it in a week''s time, it wasn''t worth keeping, KWIM? So now I''ve decided that I would get much more wear out of a ring, so I''m considering a 5 stone from Whiteflash.

 

[orbaya]

Date: 1/11/2008 3:20:35 PM
Author: mercoledi
I think you''d have to know the average diameter of 0.2 and 0.25 stones I believe I''ve read that most people can''t tell a difference of less than 0.5 mm, and since these stones will already be smallish, I doubt you''ll see that per stone but probably you''ll be able to see a difference in the ring as a whole.

Does anyone know what those diameters might be? Can we do some math?

I''ve looked at some conversion charts, and the .20''s are 3.8mm, and the .25''s are 4.1mm. I also looked at a sizing chart, and I can see a difference, but I don''t know how substantial it is when the whole ring is put together.

 

[orbaya]

Date: 1/11/2008 3:37:26 PM
Author: chickpea
.2 carat = 3.8 mm
.25 carat = 4.1 mm

here''s a link to the mm to carat conversion chart.

probably not much of a visual difference for the price, IMO

I was looking at a couple charts online, and also some charts with pictures, and there is a bit of a difference, but when the whole ring is put together, I''m wondering how it will look.

This was the only one that I could find with pictures that started smaller than .25ct.
http://www.ajediam.com/Sizes-of-Diamonds.html

 

[chickpea]

orbaya that''s an interesting link you posted - maybe there is more of a visual difference than i thought. has lesley gotten back to you with comparison photos?

 

[orbaya]

She sent me a hand pic with the 1.25ctw, which is below, but they don''t have any 1ctw bands right now. I hope that as soon as they do, they will provide me with a handshot.

Lesley said that the finger is a size 6.

 

[Lynn B]

Honestly, Orb, I hate to spend your hard-earned money, but I would DEFINITELY get the larger size. I think the visual difference, of the ring as a whole, would be significantly noticeable. I think you would really achieve the *WOW* factor with the .25 stones.

Just my humble opinion, of course. Either ring would, of course, be lovely.

 

[orbaya]

Date: 1/11/2008 9:01:57 PM
Author: Lynn B
Honestly, Orb, I hate to spend your hard-earned money, but I would DEFINITELY get the larger size. I think the visual difference, of the ring as a whole, would be significantly noticeable. I think you would really achieve the *WOW* factor with the .25 stones.

Just my humble opinion, of course. Either ring would, of course, be lovely.

Now, honestly Lynn. Do you REALLY expect me to believe that you don''t want to spend my money for me?? LOL!

I am thinking that the .25''s would be "wow", and I don''t know how many pictures I''ve looked at on here of 5 stone bands...probably every single one that''s ever been posted. At least it seems that way!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 1/11/2008 9:08:17 PM
Author: orbaya
Now, honestly Lynn. Do you REALLY expect me to believe that you don''t want to spend my money for me?? LOL!

I am thinking that the .25''s would be ''wow'', and I don''t know how many pictures I''ve looked at on here of 5 stone bands...probably every single one that''s ever been posted. At least it seems that way!

LOL!

Yeah, I''m sticking with my opinion of the .25s. Definitely the 25s.

Besides, the dreaded DSS will set in too fast with the .20s. You must trust me on this!