ave e-ring stone size where you live

[mjertl]

I'm just curious what "average" is in different places.
Because my BF and I have been talking rings lately, I've been noticing other people's rings much more. I'm a doctor in a medium-sized city (about 200,000 people) in the midwest, and even amongst other doctors I see around the hospital, it seems like most stones are definitely less than a carat. Don't get me wrong, there are some whoppers out there (a woman I work with just got married - her stone looks HUGE and it is 2 ct, which on PS isn't even that big, but where we live is waaay above average...)
Just curious!

 

[OCgirl]

I live in Orange County, California (I'm sure it's obvoius looking at my name).

My girl friends' e-rings are all ~ 1.0 - 1.5 carats.
My female coworkers have ~1.25 - 2.00 carats.

But I am sure it's way above national average.

 

[centralsquare]

I live in SF and where I live I'd say that 1ct is pretty standard. I can't really think of anyone who has gotten engaged in the past few years that has below a 1ct. Used to live in Boston for years and years and barely saw less than 2ct (amongst my friends there)!

 

[MrsBettyBoop]

I live in the midwest too and the norm appears to be way less than a carat. I would say my husband's colleagues at the hospital have a little over a carat. Usually nicely cut tho.

 

[Gypsy]

You see everything here in Nor Cal. USUALLY I would say the rings are about a carat to a carat and a half. I see plenty at about 2 carats. But if I'm in the city I see plenty at "OMG LOOKIT THE BOULDER" size too. People tend to get married later out here... that I've noticed. We don't get a lot of 21 year olds getting married so I think the diamond size reflects that too. Plus there are a lot of people on their second or third marriage... and that can up the carat weight as well.

 

[kenny]

I'd guess the average on our block is 1/2 ct.

Not poor.
Not rich.

 

[KaeKae]

I live in Ventura County, CA. Northwest of LA.
I'd say the average size stone is close to 1ct. But I do know a number of women who do not wear an ering with their wedding rings, at least that I've seen.
I also know several women who have colored stone erings, including: sapphire, ruby, london blue topaz and what I think is a citrine or yellow topaz.

 

[stci]

I'm from Quebec Canada and the average size is .25. I rarely see more than .50 except mine.

 

[Dreamer_D]

You see everything here in Nor Cal. USUALLY I would say the rings are about a carat to a carat and a half. I see plenty at about 2 carats. But if I'm in the city I see plenty at "OMG LOOKIT THE BOULDER" size too. People tend to get married later out here... that I've noticed. We don't get a lot of 21 year olds getting married so I think the diamond size reflects that too. Plus there are a lot of people on their second or third marriage... and that can up the carat weight as well.

Why do you think that is Gypsy? Age (more disposable income), or perhaps wanting to do better the second time and the ring is a sybol of that?

**

I live on the west coast of Canada and I think the average size here is maybe half a carat?

 

[Dreamer_D]

I'm from Quebec Canada and the average size is .25. I rarely see more than .50 except mine.

Yes, it might actually be closer to .30ct where I am too now that I think of it.

 

[mjertl]

You see everything here in Nor Cal. USUALLY I would say the rings are about a carat to a carat and a half. I see plenty at about 2 carats. But if I'm in the city I see plenty at "OMG LOOKIT THE BOULDER" size too. People tend to get married later out here... that I've noticed. We don't get a lot of 21 year olds getting married so I think the diamond size reflects that too. Plus there are a lot of people on their second or third marriage... and that can up the carat weight as well.

I'm 29 and (as I mentioned) a physician, so I guess I fit in the "older" demographic now ( ) and when we started looking I was thinking "1 ct," which I thought was "average," whereas dear bf was thinking 0.75-1, which I think he thought was large. Well, when I tried on a 1 ct I realized that was large, compared to what I usually see, and the average here must be around .6-.7... (maybe 1ish among female physicians I see daily, though what prompted this thread was me admiring a co-worker's very beautiful 0.5ish ct semi-bezel tonight at work... And I covet an older co-worker's 3 stone ring with the most beautiful, perfect-looking large oval diamonds I've ever seen!). Then again, I do think many people here get married at 20ish, so you're right, that might explain it...

 

[Gypsy]

You see everything here in Nor Cal. USUALLY I would say the rings are about a carat to a carat and a half. I see plenty at about 2 carats. But if I'm in the city I see plenty at "OMG LOOKIT THE BOULDER" size too. People tend to get married later out here... that I've noticed. We don't get a lot of 21 year olds getting married so I think the diamond size reflects that too. Plus there are a lot of people on their second or third marriage... and that can up the carat weight as well.

I'm 29 and (as I mentioned) a physician, so I guess I fit in the "older" demographic now ( ) and when we started looking I was thinking "1 ct," which I thought was "average," whereas dear bf was thinking 0.75-1, which I think he thought was large. Well, when I tried on a 1 ct I realized that was large, compared to what I usually see, and the average here must be around .6-.7... (maybe 1ish among female physicians I see daily, though what prompted this thread was me admiring a co-worker's very beautiful 0.5ish ct semi-bezel tonight at work... And I covet an older co-worker's 3 stone ring with the most beautiful, perfect-looking large oval diamonds I've ever seen!). Then again, I do think many people here get married at 20ish, so you're right, that might explain it...

The only reason I mention it is when I see a stone under a carat out here it's not... odd exactly, but I notice it. And I've noticed that the ladies wearing them are usually pretty young. Or they are my age and have a 12 year old and a 14 year old. Ya know?

A few times the smaller stones are in freaking AMAZING antique platinum settings and those are just so beautiful, the carat size is just a footnote.

But generally a carat is minimum. The funny thing is I'm in a fairly well paid profession, law and a lot of my cousins are doctors and lawyers. Most of their rings and my co-workers rings are at a carat or a carat and half as well and occasionally you'll see a 2 carat ring, but it's unusual as both professions tend toward conservative people who don't want to be flashy OR, on the flip side, very liberal people who feel conflicted about being well off and owning a diamond when there are people starving in Africa. Either way... smaller rocks than most would expect.

You do see large eternity bands worn often out here though, instead of engagement rings. I've seen a few blingtastic ones that have made my fingers itch to examine.

 

[Gypsy]

Dreamer--- definitely more disposable income. I've been buying sapphires for a few of DH's co-workers who are in their early 20's and getting married. Their ring budgets are around 1K or 1.5K. And many would rather have a large sapphire than a small diamond-- especially given diamond prices recently. And nice, smaller OEC's (70 points) are hard to find on demand... and most can't be put into a four prong setting because of girdle issues.

As for larger rings second time around-- one reason may be that they want to do better, but the main reason I think is... again, more disposable income at the time of the engagement.

 

[Rhea]

SE London - plain bands and eternity rings or flower shaped cluster rings mostly. I do see 1/4 - 1 carat on people regularly, but I think I notice those because they are less frequent.

 

[lknvrb4]

I live in a town of 16k in Illinois. I would say the average is. 50-.75. My 1.57 pear is large for our area.

 

[jewels2]

I am in Illinois also and I would say most people I know have about 1 carat. When I go to Chicago though I see PLENTY of 2+ stones

 

[diamondringlover]

I am in Ohio and most women have smaller e-rings, I am going to say around .25 to .50, I know among my co-workers mine is one of the larger stones and mine is only 1ct....

 

[Mayk]

I live in a small beach community in north Florida... very small community... and I would say on average.. they are larger than mine... coming in at 1.30 cts... although... my halo makes me look very average...

 

[CedarRapids]

OK. I'm going to totally make this up.

I say you take the average rent in the area and divide by 1000 and you get the average size that people are wearing.

600 rent = 0.6 carat
800 rent = 0.8 carat
1000 rent = 1.0 carat
1500 rent = 1.5 carat
2000 rent = 2.0 carat

<ducks>

 

[tyty333]

I'm in FL in a med size town. I would say the average is under a carat. Probably around .5 average. My friends are probably
closer to .8ish.

 

[centralsquare]

You see everything here in Nor Cal. USUALLY I would say the rings are about a carat to a carat and a half. I see plenty at about 2 carats. But if I'm in the city I see plenty at "OMG LOOKIT THE BOULDER" size too. People tend to get married later out here... that I've noticed. We don't get a lot of 21 year olds getting married so I think the diamond size reflects that too. Plus there are a lot of people on their second or third marriage... and that can up the carat weight as well.

Why do you think that is Gypsy? Age (more disposable income), or perhaps wanting to do better the second time and the ring is a sybol of that?

I think it's age...more disposable income and all of their similarly aged peers getting larger stones. That's my guess.

 

[centralsquare]

OK. I'm going to totally make this up.

I say you take the average rent in the area and divide by 1000 and you get the average size that people are wearing.

600 rent = 0.6 carat
800 rent = 0.8 carat
1000 rent = 1.0 carat
1500 rent = 1.5 carat
2000 rent = 2.0 carat

<ducks>

Interesting - actually seems about right!

 

[cutelittlelion]

I'm in The Netherlands, where engagement rings are quite unusual. Most engaged people only start wearing a single ring when they get married. Probably because of the influence of American tv-shows and movies this is changing a little, but stones are relatively small, about .25.

I work for an international law firm, with some blingy expat lawyers from the US and I totally blame them for my upcoming .75 e-ring

(Edited for spelling)

 

[slg47]

OK. I'm going to totally make this up.

I say you take the average rent in the area and divide by 1000 and you get the average size that people are wearing.

600 rent = 0.6 carat
800 rent = 0.8 carat
1000 rent = 1.0 carat
1500 rent = 1.5 carat
2000 rent = 2.0 carat

<ducks>

Interesting - actually seems about right!

haha that's funny...but I don't think it's accurate for where I live!

or maybe I just need a larger diamond

 

[ame]

I live in St. Louis, and it kind of varies by suburb and age. THe people around my age around usually right around a carat, some are around 3/4ct, and a lot of people seem to have Princess cuts. There are some suburbs where the average is probably 2+ tho.

 

[Orchid Lei]

I'm from Quebec Canada and the average size is .25. I rarely see more than .50 except mine.

I'm also from Quebec and I rarely see over 0.25 as well, and few solitaires actually. I have a 0.33 and a 5 stone 0.75tcw and that's very blingy for my area.

 

[Laila619]

I live in a suburb of a very large city. The girls my age here (late 20s/early 30s) have rocks. I'd say 1.5 - 2 carats is average. A lot of blingy settings too, I don't see solitaires very often.

 

[Calliope]

I'm in The Netherlands, where engagement rings are quite unusual. Most engaged people only start wearing a single ring when they get married. Probably because of the influence of American tv-shows and movies this is changing a little, but stones are relatively small, about .25.

Same here in Austria. Just one of my friends asked for a solitaire e-ring and it's about 0.2ct. All of the others went with a small number of tiny diamonds in their wedding bands (eternity or half eternity diamond bands are also uncommon around here).

 

[alene]

OK. I'm going to totally make this up.

I say you take the average rent in the area and divide by 1000 and you get the average size that people are wearing.

600 rent = 0.6 carat
800 rent = 0.8 carat
1000 rent = 1.0 carat
1500 rent = 1.5 carat
2000 rent = 2.0 carat

<ducks>

Interesting thought! Our rent was $1700 at the time we got engaged, so my 1.6 ct was pretty close. Too bad I didn't get to upgrade when we moved to a bigger place, that was $3000

Here in Brooklyn, it's really hard to estimate the average, things vary so much even among different neighborhoods. I think even in my very affluent neighborhood though, the average is definitely smaller than in Manhattan, probably somewhere between 1.5 and 2cts but there are plenty of smaller and larger stones as well. I work in a hospital in Brooklyn and my ring gets so much attention, I hardly wear it. A good friend of mine, who's a physician in Manhattan has mentioned that her stone (2.5 cts) is much smaller than those of most of her patients.

 

[Begonia]

I live on Vancouver Island, and I see mostly well under a carat (avg about .40 ct). There are some ladies here that have very big stones, but many of them are American interestingly enough. Nobody knows what my 1 ct EC is!