ACA or CBI?

[OoohShiny]

Will there be any plan to (or likelyhood of) upgrade in the future?

You may wish to consider the upgrade policies of both vendors as I think they are different.

 

[ringo865]

I get that you are worried about plotted feathers in a VS2, but would you not be at least as concerned with an unknown grade-setting SI inclusion that could be anywhere (and at that size, many places) in the stone ?

If you can't wrap your mind around a VS2 inclusion, don't custom cut an SI stone. Probably better to look at higher clarity, even if you cusrom cut.

 

[SimoneDi]

Once again, I agree with others, there are a lot of unknowns when it comes to custom cutting and several times we have seen on PS that stones have come back with lower grading than anticipated. The vendors made up for the discrepancies each time, however, you need to be very open minded when it comes to the final outcome. I had an SI2 stone with feathers from a preferred vendor and never had any worries about durability. I had also smacked the ring on multiple occasions against hard objects, nothing ever happened to the stone. The feather in the ACA stone is on the pavilion side and it is an internal inclusions. It can easily be protected by a prong as well, but once again, I could not be concerned about that particular VS2 stone.

 

[carbonfan]

I am wholeheartedly on the Whiteflash ACA train as well, but I am also the owner of a few ACAs so I am admittedly biased. But the stone you posted looks wonderful! In addition, this ACA is a bit more expensive but it is also worthy of consideration and is an amazingly clean VS2 (and no feathers!)... I think it is truly an amazing stone. I would spring for either this one or the one you posted in a heartbeat! Lastly, if you want to go with a no holds barred approach, there is this one, and you would never need to think about upgrading! In any case, I would always vote for an available stone over the ambiguity of a custom cut. You truly can't go wrong with ACAs, and the trade up policy is hard to beat. It is a win-win situation all the way around! Good luck with your decision, and please keep us posted!!

 

[HappyNewLife]

Hi there,
Thank you for your advice. Would you happen to know if there is a warranty or refund for WF should something happen to the diamond? (Such as an unlikely event that it would be damaged) I'm concerned with the inclusions (feathers) near the girdle.

Just shoot them an email or call them to ask. They're awesome with customer service

 

[EvaEvans]

Do you think the feathers could spread? Is that generally why it’s avoided?

Feather on the girdle make girdle more fragile in this point and could lead to chipping if hit hard object or even during mounting. But it all depends of the size of the feather and the circumstances. I still would suggest looking for better VS2 or even VS1 stone. In fact, even some SI1 are very good option. That's why I always analise the inclusion plot.

 

[cflutist]

Haha yes. vs was supposed to be VS, not versus. So. To clarify: I would pick "A for-sure VS ACA. Now". (Instead of a maybe SI CBI stone later. Which may cost more money). They are both on par cutwise.

The price on a cut to order CBI is agreed to before hand. If it comes back better, no change in price and you win. This has happened to several clients. If it comes back worse, the price is adjusted downward and you can accept it, walk away, or have them cut another one.

 

[PepperT]

I would keep options open and keep looking until a diamond comes available that doesn't raise any concerns in your mind. Spending that kind of money, I think you should be completely happy with your diamond.

 

[gm89uk]

Feather on the girdle make girdle more fragile in this point and could lead to chipping if hit hard object or even during mounting. But it all depends of the size of the feather and the circumstances. I still would suggest looking for better VS2 or even VS1 stone. In fact, even some SI1 are very good option. That's why I always analise the inclusion plot.

There has never been any evidence here that someone has had a chip from a feather, especially in a VS2 in a MRB. Maybe a feather in a pointed stone, but not a MRB. In fact all experts that have posted on this topic have posted the contrary, as such chipping risk is really not a reason to discredit this stone.

Will there be any plan to (or likelyhood of) upgrade in the future?

You may wish to consider the upgrade policies of both vendors as I think they are different.

Both vendors have 100 percent value life time upgrade. CBI has a better buy back policy while WF is time limited.

 

[cflutist]

There has never been any evidence here that someone has had a chip from a feather, especially in a VS2 in a MRB. Maybe a feather in a pointed stone, but not a MRB. In fact all experts that have posted on this topic have posted the contrary, as such chipping risk is really not a reason to discredit this stone.



Both vendors have 100 percent value life time upgrade. CBI has a better buy back policy while WF is time limited.

CBI has a lifetime 80% buyback policy


Whiteflash has a 1-year 70% buyback policy

 

[EvaEvans]

There has never been any evidence here that someone has had a chip from a feather, especially in a VS2 in a MRB.

If feather is on the girdle (as in this case), and if the girdle is thin or thin-medium (as in this case), there is more risk of chipping. Feather is in fact a crack. VS2 is not safe clarity, VS2 is eye clean clarity. Thin girdle could chip even without feather. I just point that this specific diamond clarity is potentially more risky of chipping.

 

[gm89uk]

If feather is on the girdle (as in this case), and if the girdle is thin or thin-medium (as in this case), there is more risk of chipping. Feather is in fact a crack. VS2 is not safe clarity, VS2 is eye clean clarity. Thin girdle could chip even without feather. I just point that this specific diamond clarity is potentially more risky of chipping.

Very thin girdle is at danger of chipping, hence the discrediting from excellent cut grade with GIA. Thin girdle is much more accepted as safe; of course any diamond can chip.

Additionally the risk is there with very thin girdle, in combination with a shallow crown; the crown angle is not shallow.

Thirdly, thin girdle is relative to diameter. This is a whopping 3.1carat stone. I don't have the size but based on the proportions you can work out it's around 9.34mm.

Let's say thin girdle is 1.5 percent, on a 4.5mm stone that would be 3.1% which would no longer be thin. Even if by AGS standards thin can be as low as 0.5 percent, still gives enough diamond to protect it

The average girdle depth here appears to be 3.7 percent which is good.

Have you got a reference/experience for VS2 feathers not being safe? I've searched thoroughly on this forum and other sources and found 0 issues or precautions against this by experts in the field, but I am happy to be corrected.

WF can easily comment on whether the feather corresponds to the thinnest part of the girdle, but as many have written before, the girdle has already been under tremendous stress and impact in the process of bruting and survived to tell the tale.

 

[EvaEvans]

@gm89uk,
The risk of chipping the girdle is higher if a feather inclusion hit the surface especially on the thinner part such as girdle. VS2 clarity is not VVS2. Also, feathers tend to increase in size with the time if diamond is under pressure.
Even if the risk of chipping is minimal in this particular WF ACA diamond, I would not recommend such VS2 clarity, if there is an option getting better VS2.
There are plenty of comments for chipped diamonds on the girdle! Many of the PS users don't present the lab certificate or don't make scientific research if some feather inclusion was somewhere there. However, every diamond specialist would agree that feathers hitting the surface decrease diamond strength and increase the risk of chipping during cutting, mounting or wearing. Let me mention other diamond inclusions that in fact are some kind of chipping: indented natural, cavity, bruise. As higher is the diamond crystal clarity, as higher is the diamond resistance of chipping during cutting, mounting and wearing.

 

[poshmommy]

Hi, I'll be the dessenting opinion here and say that if the prices are on par, and youre not on a deadline, I'd prefer the custom, simply for the idea that it was specifically cut for you. And with a CBI you can be confident it will turn out looking great.

I don't know if you're getting this for an ering or a gift but if you are, my thoughts are that if my SO got me a ring and said 'I had this gorgeous diamond custom cut just for you' I'd feel it was something extra special.. (Even if rationally I'd know it's not much different from another already cut stone, I think it adds something sentimental to it)

I have personally had a custom cut done for a 4 carat stone and firmly believe that custom cutting should be a LAST resort option. I wanted something very specific that was never going to be cut for stock by either of the 2 vendors that cut these stones. If I had the luxury of choosing a stone out of stock, I would have done that for sure. It is a time consuming, stressful process for everyone involved. There are so many variables. I don't understand why you would pay more to custom cut something that does not sound like it will be better than the stock diamond and could quite possibly end up worse. Stones in the range you are looking for come up several times a year at Whiteflash. I'm sure they are not uncommon at CBI either. I would advise you to keep watching their stock if you decide to pass on the ACA. There really is no need to custom cut in this situation.

In the end, everything worked out for me, and I love my stone. But I am glad it's over.

 

[carbonfan]

I completely agree with @poshmommy. If you can find something that checks all of the boxes that is available in inventory, that is the safest choice. No guesswork, no surprises, no waiting, no stress (all of which can come into play with custom cuts). Custom cuts require a cast-iron stomach and the ability to give up a good bit of control (neither of which is easy for any of us!). So if you can find something that is already available (and many great choices have been mentioned!), that is your best option and I think you will be happier in the long run. The 3.115 G ACA that you originally posted is beautiful, but if you have any lingering concerns about the feather, take a hard look at the 3.050 F ACA as it is absolutely gorgeous as well. Of course we can convey our preferences all day long, but ultimately only you can decide what is right for you and what will give you the best peace of mind. However, I can assure you that you will not be disappointed with an ACA; they are absolutely dazzling! And WF's customer service is top notch as well. You can't go wrong with them, and your significant other is very lucky indeed!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

A couple of important things to keep in mind with regard to durability:

The first thing to understand about durability is that it is an important factor that is specifically taken into account in the laboratory grading process. Typically, a diamond with an elevated durability risk from a feather, cleavage, natural or any number of other potential features, will be downgraded into the Imperfect range if the grader detects a structural durability issue.

Susceptibility to chipping at the girdle line due to any knife edges is controlled in the cut grading process. Deductions are made for this type of durability issue. Clarity based durability is taken into account by the human grader at the time the clarity grade is rendered.

A ideal cut round diamond in the VS range has therefore been vetted for durability and has been deemed to be safely in the range where of any concern about an elevated durability risk is a non-issue.

Well cut lab graded round diamonds in the Si and above are incredibly durable. Our practical experience is noteworthy as our diamonds come back to us for trade-up on a regular basis. Most have been worn daily for as long as 18 years. It is very unusual for them to have even a small chip or scratch.

That said, it is possible to damage even a flawless ideal cut diamond. While diamond is the hardest known natural substance, it is not indestructible. Budgeting for a good jewelry insurance policy makes a lot of sense in that it provides peace of mind that damage, as well as loss and theft, will be fully covered.

 

[Lore]

That said, it is possible to damage even a flawless ideal cut diamond. While diamond is the hardest known natural substance, it is not indestructible. Budgeting for a good jewelry insurance policy makes a lot of sense in that it provides peace of mind that damage, as well as loss and theft, will be fully covered.

Out of curiosity, for a chipped diamond, how would insurance work? It's not possible to repair the diamond back to its original state, so do policies pay out the loss in value, or would they pay for the person to replace the diamond entirely? Or could the diamond be repolished/recut to repair the damage?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Out of curiosity, for a chipped diamond, how would insurance work? It's not possible to repair the diamond back to its original state, so do policies pay out the loss in value, or would they pay for the person to replace the diamond entirely? Or could the diamond be repolished/recut to repair the damage?

I have only direct experience with one company - Jewelers Mutual - so this does not necessarily apply to others. Since JM specializes in jewelry they are adept at doing whatever they need to do to make the client whole after a loss. In most cases, damage to a diamond is relatively minor - think chips and scratches. In those cases, diamonds can often be repolished with very little weight loss. The insured would typically opt to keep their diamond and have JM pay for the repair and any value loss in the weight differential. If the damage is more significant the insured would probably opt for a replacement of like kind and quality. JM would then own the original diamond and liquidate it through their network to mitigate their loss.

 

[gm89uk]

@gm89uk,
VS2 clarity is not VVS2.
Thank you quite aware of this.

Also, feathers tend to increase in size with the time if diamond is under pressure.
There are numerous references that VS and SI feathers are highly unlikely to extend particularly as the pressure endured in cutting surpasses most what people would put the diamond through, through wear

Even if the risk of chipping is minimal in this particular WF ACA diamond, I would not recommend such VS2 clarity, if there is an option getting better VS2.

The other option was a custom cut SI diamond

There are plenty of comments for chipped diamonds on the girdle! Many of the PS users don't present the lab certificate or don't make scientific research if some feather inclusion was somewhere there. However, every diamond specialist would agree that feathers hitting the surface decrease diamond strength and increase the risk of chipping during cutting, mounting or wearing.
Please read through these links that are directly that have experience with feathers at the girdle.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/are-feathers-near-the-edge-dangerous.44773/
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...hould-i-avoid-a-feather-on-the-girdle.214971/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-advice.223513/#p4042766

I don't mean to be argumentative, and although caution is advised, I just don't want the many silent readers to blindly pass up VS2 (not VVS2) girdle feather stones that would otherwise be perfect based on these posts, with no evidence from numerous experts over a life time of experience that it has caused issues.

 

[EvaEvans]

@gm89uk
* Still there are variations of VS2 clarity, so my advise is to analyze the inclusion plot.
* There is always an option to pass on and keep looking.
* Sellers will always defend their business point of view. But I am curious, what kind of diamonds they personally buy? I bet they are very picky for their private needs!
* Theoretically feather could coincide with diamond cleavage that leads to diamond weakness in that area.
* Surviving the cutting process does not insure diamond against chipping.
* Normal wear might not cause chipping, but accidental hitting could.
Remember, diamonds are hard, but fragile. Sounds like oxymoron, right? Cleaving or sawing is the first step of cutting process that use exactly that cleavage feature of diamond.
We should try to analyze scientifically not emotionally. For example, some people don't mind fluorescence, some do, some will make more research before to commit purchase of fluorescent diamond. It all depends! Some people are OK with feathers on girdle, some will hesitate. I personally have amazing VS1 diamond with small feather on girdle and I don't mind, because I look at the whole picture.