AJaffe E-Ring....Thoughts??

[ccuheartnurse]

Hi Guys,
As some of you know, I'm assisting my FSIL in getting her e-ring. The diamond would be about .85 ct. I had contacted a jeweler in Buffalo who said in checking with AJaffe, said this ring is 5-5.5mm at top tapering to 3.5mm at bottom. They said the diamond quality is SI-1, G/H so if she chose either an I or J stone, these sidestones would be fine. She has a 6 1/2 size finger. She wants this ring in the 14K White Gold version which is at a phenominal price. Oh sorry, forgot to add, the sidestones are .59pts in t.c.w. Not too shabby.

My questions are these:
1. What is the general concensus on this ring?
2. Do any of you forsee any safety issues with the prongs?
3. Do you think its too wide for a .85 stone? I think the diam. is about 6.10 or so with that size stone.

As for my opinion, I like it. Its not a ring I would choose for myself, but she loves it & thats all that matters. I bought a "boring solitaire". hahaha She wants something with a bit of a modern edge to it.

Judy

 

[canadiangrrl]

Hi Judy,

Well, I'm a boring solitaire girl myself, but that's a pretty setting.

Sometimes I find that settings with sidestones are either clunky looking or detract from the center stone, but this one doesn't have either problem, IMO. I would prefer six prongs to four, not for safety so much as I just like the look of six much better with a round. Don't think this particular setting would work so well with six, though.

I think that setting would probably look quite nice with a .85 stone - not too wide at all, and nicely in balance with the rest of the ring.

Btw, you deserve a medal for doing all of this research for your FSIL.

 

[jenibear]

I think that setting is gorgeous and would not be too wide at all. I actually prefer rings that are almost as thick as the center stone. If they are done right - like this one - the center stones is still "center stage."
It's all personal preference.
Nice pick - she has great taste and you are just so nice to do this.
If you are indicative of how welcoming your family is to her she's likely a very happy bride-to-be.
Please post photos when its finished!

edited to add:
I think the thickness of the prongs may make up for the fact that there are only four? Could that be?

Jenibear

 

[Mara]

Has your FSIL tried on the Jaffe rings? They are very clunky when on, esp when you try to close your hand (on the sides). I am not a fan of them at all...they look very beautiful in the ring cases, but on my hand...no thanks. Not a big fan of the clunky prongs or overall metal look of the entire ring. 5mm is huge for me...too much metal. My ring is 2.6mm and I love the width. One note is that with a diamond around .85c in size, the 5mm may be a little wide..overpower the look of the stone itself a bit?




But its all about preferences. If she likes the look, then she should go for it....

 

[diamondlil]

Hi Judy.


I REALLY like this ring. I've seen quite a few rings recently with the little surprise diamonds on the front and back sides of the center stone which I thinks is really fun and interesting. The prongs look heavy enough to protect the center stone so I would not have a worry about 4 prongs versus 6. I can see how the stones down the sides would cause the ring to be bulky between the fingers, but I agree this is a personal thing. I tend to like a chunkier band than some so I know this would not be an issue for me, but it might be umcomfortable to some people. I think the setting looks modern yet not too contemporary.




Has she seen this ring in person and tried it on? I think I would try to track it down and see it. Sometimes rings look totally different on your hand than in the picture. Then again, I'm pretty picky.




Let us know what you decide. If you get it, I'd like to see a picture on her hand.

Diamondlil

 

[Mikesgirl]

It's a beautiful ring. As to width - for comparison's sake, here's my set - my wedding band is 5.5mm wide and the engagement ring is 3mm wide. The stone is 5.77 in diameter. I have chunkier prongs too, and chose the heavier 4 prong (yes, they are heavier for safety) over the 6 prong because my old 6 prong seemed to get caught on everthing and the setting got distorted more easily (I'm left handed).

Width is a personal thing, but I personally find the setting you show to be substantial but beautiful.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

Hi Guys,
Thank you kindly for responding.

I didnt really know what kind of a project I was taking on when I said I would help her. She nor her bf have a computer so I felt bad & I didnt want them to get ripped off from the local chain store they were looking at buying their ring.
She, my FSIL, has fallen madly in love with this ring. Thank goodness I could pin point her down on one aspect of this adventure. haha The ring she originally saw was one from Peter storm, same prongs but with 3 princess stones set on an angle on each side. Peter Storm is VERY expensive. I'm not certain she has tried on this setting to be honest with you. All I know is that she oooohs, & ahhhhhs when she sees the ring or talks about it. Mara, I'm with you, I dont like a wide band either. My ring is max. 3.8 at its widest point somewhere on the shoulders & my 1.55 looks huge. I'm worried that with it being 5mm up top, that the stone might not get centre stage. Mikesgirl, I like your e-ring, & in fact, thought about that style, which is similar to Gregg's ring. But, my FSIL didnt like it.

Judy

 

[Mara]

ccu...definitely get her to try it on...she may put it on and not like it...that has happened to me a few times while searching. Something can look so great in the case but not on your hand. So before she really makes up her mind...have her try it on. Then if she loves it...it's really her call!

 

[Mikesgirl]

I agree with Mara - She may be suprised at how chunky it feels, or she may love the weight. But absolutely find a place to try it on. That should be her homework.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

Well, all I can say if she doesnt like the ring when it comes in, its her own fault. I agree Marty about looking for her ring is her homework & I gave her a list of stores they needed to go look at. I dont think she has. She did say last night that she tried on something like the one from AJaffe but was a bit shorter & she was ok with it being a bit taller. But you know how different rings feel from different manufacturers. Heck, there are a few stores in the Buffalo & surrounding area that carry AJaffe & I told her to take a road trip & go try them on. She thought I was crazy cause she would have to drive 2hrs. I guess I am cause **I** went to Buffalo to try on some AJaffe rings. Damn, I must need to be committed.

I wasnt going to get a ring & not have tried it on 1st. But hell, thats just me I guess.

My ring finger is a 5.5-5.75 & I thought the Jaffe rings felt ok, they werent chunky at all. I checked the spacing between her fingers & they sit farther than mine do so she shouldnt have any problems.

Ok, gotta go to this boring cardiology conference.

Judy

 

[headlight]

I agree with both of MARA's posts; my e-ring is also approx. 2.6 mm and I love it that narrow. When I add its matching band, another approx. 2.6 mm, it is plenty wide for me (actually feels "too much" if my fingers are puffy from heat/water retention). Also, I am in the process of getting a shared prong eternity band and that will be plenty wide so I'm glad the e-ring is only 2.6 mm. Also, MARA made a great point in regards to the stone being "overtaken" by the width of the shank. I personally like the stone to appear larger than the width of the shank, but that is my personal preference and I know that many women like rings of large width. But I do feel that it is imperative that she try it on. Also, is there a matching band? (I don't know which A Jaffe ring you are referring to)? She should give consideration to what she wants to do about the band because if there isn't something that goes with it, it could be difficult to find something that will "fit", thus requiring her to have something custom made (which isn't a problem to do as long as she is okay with that idea).