Am I splitting hairs?

[jewelgirl]

OK... I am afraid I may have become obsessed with Pricescope. Now I think I might be oversensitive to stats. Is one MUCH MUCH better than the other? Please tell me which one you would choose. I will buy one or the other in the next day or so.

2.19 H SI2 RB EGL
d: 60.8%
t: 56.9%
cr ang: 34.7
pav ang: 40.9
pol:vg
sym:ex
flouro: none
HCA score 1.7
8.37-8.44 *5.13
12,517.00

2.225 J SI2 RB ACA AGS
d: 60.4%
t: 56%
cr ang: 34.7
pav ang: 40.7
pol:id
sym:id
flouro: none
HCA score .9
8.46-8.50 *5.13
15,156.00

Both are told to be completely eyeclean with no black inclusions...all number info is from sarin repts. Both supposedly face up very white. The second diamond is a H&A diamond.

Iguess I am wondering if I could really tell the difference between these two as far as cut, b/c they are so close in angles etc. Both are excellent stones, it appears, and the 1st one seems to be a very good deal, for something so close to h&A. If I choose # 2 will I be paying extra $ mainly for the brand of ACA?

I REALLY need advice...I am choosing between these two...

 

[blueroses]

Hmmm...I will let the RB experts weigh in on the ##s, but I will say that with the EGL option, you need to be prepared for it to actually be like a GIA I I1, rather than an H SI2. Eye-clean is in the eye of the beholder, so I''d want to SEE them before choosing...

 

[aljdewey]

All the numbers/stats on both diamonds look fine.....as long as they are what they say they are.

If this were me, I'd negotiate a fairly generous return window with the seller of the EGL stone, and I'd set an appointment with a trusted appraiser before making the purchase. If the appraiser says the EGL diamond IS indeed an H and is an eyeclean SI2, then I think that's a GREAT find.

If the appraiser comes back and says that it's an I or even a J by GIA standards, it still seems like a decent price. I'd stress to your appraiser that you're most concerned about the clarity being accurate. You want eyeclean....that's the key.

If the appraiser finds it lower than a J or finds the clarity lower than SI2, then I'd go with the 2nd stone.

By the numbers, the cuts are comparable. Yes, the EGL stone has VG/ex instead of id/id, but that's nothing your eye will ever see.

 

[MissAva]

I prefer the second, but again I would want to see a ton of photos and likely see the stones in person. Some are more color sensitive. Are you sure you can handle a J? Eye-clean is hard to determine without seeing the stone and looking at it from every angle...sides esp since they will be seen from the side. Are you dealing with a local or on-line vendor? Can you go and see them or have photos sent to you? Just beucase an inclusion isnt black doesnt mean it might not bother you.

 

[Lynn B]

WOW, I see your dilemma.

I''m w/ Alj. All I can possibly add is my very humble personal opinion on the J/SI2 thing. I would not be afraid of that with #2. If WF says it''s eye-clean, then I believe them. Period. And I LOVE my new "J"... honestly, I just don''t think you''ll see "anything" but blinding sparkles and fire.

#2 is the "safer" choice... it''s a winner and there''s no doubt. But it''s almost 3K more. That''s a lot of money - and it would probably buy your setting!

#1 has the potential to be a real winner, too... there are just a few "variables" -- but they are "surmountable", and the stone could well be worth it, and save you a ton of money.

Both HCA scores are excellent, no need to split hairs there.

At this point, it kind of boils down to your own personality. When you weigh it all out... what are you leaning towards?

Keep us posted!
Lynn

 

[hoorray]

Can you get idealscope pictures and pictures of the inclusions? That might help to differentiate the two. EGL has a rep for being softer, but Leonid''s study showed that EGL USA was not always the most lienient grader, so #1 COULD be a find. You just need to have it verified, and see if there are any other cut differences that the specs don''t show that impact theoverall light return and beauty. An idealscope or ASET pic can do this.

 

[jewelgirl]

Thanks to all who have chimed in to help me with this huge dilemma! I have to make my decsision by monday!

The reason I feel I can handle a J is because denise at WF said that she put this stone (#2) next to a G and could not see the diff in color face up, but could from the sides. I totally believe her when she says this, and that it is eyeclean. she even said she does not know why it is an si2...It should be an SI1. But I don't care as long as there is nothing I can see! Not only that, but I have heard many people on PS singing the praises of their J SI2. Not to mention Lynn B, who I have read discussing the love she has for her jSI2 from WF! I would have never considered it except for these glowing endorsements!

Both of the vendors are online, and both have been totally honest and upfront in all the previous stones we have "inspected" together and even told me not to go with something I though might work out as OK, for one reason or another. Both vendors have a sunstantial return window. #1 is 30 day return policy. I trust both vendors. The vendor on the 1st stone has told me they think that #1 could probably be an I rather than an H...but if it is, it is darn close. and that it is a ligit SI2. This is stil lleaves me in a quandry...

After I posted the first in this thread I recieved pics from the #1 vendor through an H&A scope and also pics in a "ring grabber"...these pics were just taken on spur of the moment b/c I asked for them, and are far from perfect, but I will see if I can figure out how to post them just for more info for anyone who wants to chime in and help me!

I am leaning toward #1, simply for price alone. I know that #2 is a safer bet, being ags, and aca and all, and that the stats are tighter on #2...but for 3k extra??? Also, I am wondering if I would be able to tell the difference between either stone once it is set and on my finger? That is the main dillema. Can one tell between a hca score of .9 and an hca score of 1.7? Would .9 be a WOWza and 1.7 not so much?

OK I am going to try and upload pics that I got for both choices....hope I can figure it out...If I have to I will get my computer loving hubby in here to help me!

Thanks Again!

 

[jewelgirl]

Here is the first pic of #1

 

[jewelgirl]

next pic of #1

 

[jewelgirl]

Oops missed the one above...here it is still #1

 

[jewelgirl]

hearts on #1

 

[jewelgirl]

arrows#1

 

[Lynn B]

I''m not even gonna try to interpret the H&A images... let''s leave that to those more experienced than I am.

But I CAN comment on this question of yours: Can one tell between a hca score of .9 and an hca score of 1.7? Would .9 be a WOWza and 1.7 not so much?

No - not at all. Now you are splitting hairs.

Both scores are EXCELLENT. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT worry about that!!!

But the photo of #1 looks gorgeous! THAT I can interpret!

I know where you are coming from... $3,000 is a LOT of $$$! I would think long and hard before I spent it if I didn''t "need" to, too!

And as for a J facing up like a G -- I can certainly vouch for that. When I had my new diamond (J) and my old diamond (G) face up, side by side, I couldn''t tell a difference either. Not even a little bit. Honestly -- NOT AT ALL!!!

Weigh out all the nuances of each one, and then choose. But remember, you have a return policy with each one -- so if it disappoints you when you see it in person - you can always go to Plan B!

Keep us posted!
Lynn

 

[icekid]

wow... I don''t know if #2 is worth an extra 3 grand, because #1 looks beautiful!!!

 

[Maxine]

Do you have pics of #2 to compare????

 

[strmrdr]

For the 3k difference id be real tempted to snag #1

Its 2-3 facets being slightly off from being h&a.
good arrows.
Which means the main pavilian reflectors are good.
Good angles.


If you want to get closer to perfect go with #2.

otherwise:
The eye visible difference assuming both are eyeclean isnt 3k worth in my book.

 

[jewelgirl]

here is the WF pics for #2...these are jst what was on the site with the diamond

 

[jewelgirl]

here is idealscope pic for #2...no doubt about it...almost perfect

 

[jewelgirl]

Yep...It is certain that #2 is the more perfect candidate. But I am feeling better about leaning toward #1 with all the encouragement from you all who really know what you are talking about! I had never thought about it, that way, LynnB, but the extra 3 k could pay for the setting! Boy, will hubby be happy to hear that!

He has been leaning toward #2 b/c he likes the "insurance" of the AGS and ACA. However, I know a lot more about diamonds than he does at this point in time, due to all of ya'll's help and reading through literally hundreds of back threads in the last few weeks, so he might listen to me when I say the experts on PS are all giving a thumbs up!

I did notice that the hearts on #1 are a little off, but I did not know that it was 2-3 facets, and what that meant as far as light return, etc. The arrows did look to be perfectly aligned on #1. strmrdr mentined that this meant that it had good pavilion reflectors...what does that mean? I assume it is a good thing, and about the 1 millionth thing I am about to learn from this TRULY fabulous forum....

 

[hoorray]

They are probably both beautiful stones -- even if the ACA is the more exacting cut. You might consider having them both sent to a local, independent appraiser so that you can compare and contrast them in person. You''ll typically pay shipping for the one you return, plus the appraiser time, but that seems like not too much to pay for the peace of mind of not having to second guess this decision.

Even if you can''t arrange to have them both sent in together, having a stone sent to an independent appraiser before you pay for it is a good, safe way to go.

Good luck!

 

[Mara]

The price difference between 1 and 2 is huge...and it will pay for the setting and then some probably.

If the first stone checks out in terms of color and clarity, and it looks nice and white and eye-clean in those pictures you posted, I''d pocket the $3k and get the first stone.

I own a few almost H&A stones and they are the best deals in my opinion, your naked eye does not pick up the perfection of some of these branded H&A cuts...and I love my almost H&A stones to where they are the FIRST OPTION for me...over a branded stone. Inventory depending of course....

But the numbers on the first one are very nice as is the price and especially if it''s a real H SI2, so I''d get it, get it checked out and go from there...

Obviously the 2nd stone is going to be beautiful...but I think the real Q here is 1 vs 2 and I think 1 is worth checking into further if for nothing else than the $3k savings!

 

[MissAva]

I am with everyone else, number ones pictures look really lovely. 3 thousand dollars more for a size increase that you may or may not be able to see. I would say at least look at number one. That price differnce could be put towards so many other things.

 

[jewelgirl]

I think, so far, everyone is confirming my thoughts. I think #1 looks good enough to at least buy and take to an appraiser to make sure it is at least an I SI2...if not the H, and make sure it is eyeclean.

What I was worried about the most is if I could tell a difference btwn the .9 HCA and the 1.7 HCA score, but as LynnB confirmed...that might really be splitting hairs! I was just unsure because I have never seen the difference in what a .9 looks like to a 1.7 HCA score stone. But I guess the consensus, is...not much different, as they will both be beautiful.

And as Matatora says...3k more for .03 ct size difference...I really don't think I will see the size difference.

I will have to show hubby this thread...maybe it will put his mind at ease about choosing the non-AGS stone.

Mara's endorsement of almost h&A stones is really helpful, too. It is just so hard for someone hwo has not had the ability to look at bunches and bunches of stones to know if there will be a difference to the human eye!

 

[Mara]

JG...I''ll share something Brian told me a while back when I was hemming and hawing over one of my stone purchases with them.

It was about how precisely an ES almost H&A stone was cut vs one that made it into ACA. This ES stone was meant to be an ACA but it didn''t make the grade. I asked if my eye could tell the difference if I got the ES instead of the ACA.

He noted that he could tell the differences obviously but that the naked human eye would not be able to discern the perfection of something like an ACA over a superbly cut almost H&A stone like one of theirs that was meant to be cut like that but just didn''t make it. He said that basically our basic consumer eyes can''t tell those small nuances, all we see is the sparkle.

Anyway, that really made an impression on me and I will say that while I would consider an ACA if no ES stones were available, my first and always choice will go to an ES stone or something that is almost as precisely cut as an ACA or similar because of the price savings, and as long as I can make sure the stone meets my requirements in things like numbers, look, eye-cleanliness etc...that savings can be that $3k you are looking at here which is nothing to sneeze at. This is just why I would not buy an HOF stone or an Eightstar if the price difference was huge...for me unbranded is just as good. Esp from a reputable company.

So I''d check out that first stone and if it does not meet your requirements, then get the 2nd! As I noted, the 2nd is obviously going to be a winner, it is amazing....but that first one could be a sleeper!!