Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Battle between two stones - opinions please

V

vj2651

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
22
In the market for a 1.4-1.5 round brilliant cut and was sent these two stones from a local dealer. I've done a good amount of research and have a good idea about judging diamonds for an amateur. I understand these two stones are not identical and choosing one would be a matter of personal taste.

Stone #1 - 1.40 ct. E/SI 1. AGS graded. 7.21x7.25x4.36 Cut: 000. Table: 59.9 Depth: 60.3 Cutlet: pointed. Angles 32.6 and 41.2 Holloway score comes out to 2.4 after plugging in the numbers on pricescope tools section.

Stone #2 - 1.50 ct E/SI 1. GIA graded. 7.30x7.32x4.535 Cut: XXX Table: 57 Depth:62 Cutlet: None Angles 36.0 and 40.8 Holloway score comes out to 3.6 after plugging in the numbers on pricescope tools section.

Stone #2 costs $1500 more.

I just learned about the Hollway scores after reading this site. How big of a difference is 2.4 vs 3.6 in regard to these stones?

Considering all factors: looks, size and cost what do the experts think is the best option? I'm not necessarily choosing one or the other but if I HAD to choose one which one would you guys recommend and why?

I plan on seeing the stones in person but it wont be for another 10 days.

Thanks in advance.

On a side note...I posted this same topic in another forum on this site and want to delete it because I'm assuming this is the right spot? Any info on how to do that or will a mod take care of it?
 
I would drop both like a ton of bricks and keep looking for a top performer that scores 2 and under on the HCA. The visual impact makes a huge difference. As for the second thread, I'd contact the moderators via the "report concern" icon and request that they remove it. RT is the right place to ask these types of questions.
 
The difference is not large; also the rounding in GIA angles makes HCA a little imprecise (model is only as good as its input.)

With the numbers given, the stones are roughly as good as each other, but the AGS a bit better; low precision in the GIA numbers might make the diamond better than what HCA predicts. It is a matter of personal taste at this point.

You can hit the button, "report concern" if you need to delete a thread.
 
The problem to me with paying the premium of going over 1.5 cts is that that stone faces up small. I'd want a 1.5 ct. diamond to be 7.4mm in diameter or very close to it. There are lots of ideal cut diamonds around. Don't limit yourself to just those two,.
 
thanks for the info. I just started looking and these were the first two stones that were presented to me. I'm on a mission to find a great stone and plan on looking at 100's before ultimately deciding.

@julieN: I was thinking the same thing that the AGS was slightly better. Good point regarding the rounding in GIA, never thought of that.

@diamondseeker2006: What do you mean by the stone faces up small and you would want the diamond to be 7.4mm? Is the 1.4 ct a good size at 7.21x7.25mm?

Thanks
 
There is a premium for stones that make certain weights, .5, .75, 1.00, 1.25, 1.5 etc so many diamond cutters cut for weight rather than light performance because they yeild more profit. An ideally cut stone requires the cutter to cut away more of the rough so they cost more for consumers, yet cut is the most important characteristic of a diamond, it's what gives it it's amazing optical qualities. 1% of all diamonds are cut to ideal proportions. The ideal diameter for a 1.5ct stone is 7.4mm approximately. Extra weight is often hidden in the stones depth and girdle causing the stone to 'face up' smaller than an ideal cut stone.
 
Thanks Christina.

I thought I knew what I was looking at until I came here. You guys have been a great help.
 
Yes, a 1.4 at 7.2mm is good. Take a look at measurements on some super ideal cuts such as WhiteFlash ACA's. You really and truly don't have to look at 100's of stones if you just look at stones that fall into the ideal cut parameters.

Very nice search tool here:

https://www.pricescope.com/diamond-search-results
 
What do you guys think of this stone:

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/1.40-carat-f-vs2-hearts-and-arrows-round-cut-diamond-gid-94478.html

Its a little bit more then what I wanted to pay for a 1.4 ct stone but not much more. I've been searching this site and it gets very hard to compare stones and what a average price should be for certain stones. This price seems fair to me but anyone else have any input?

I would have preferred to buy the stone locally, in Chicago, so I can see the stone in person. Has anyone had problems with this dealer before?
 
vj2651|1352568567|3302687 said:
What do you guys think of this stone:

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/1.40-carat-f-vs2-hearts-and-arrows-round-cut-diamond-gid-94478.html

Its a little bit more then what I wanted to pay for a 1.4 ct stone but not much more. I've been searching this site and it gets very hard to compare stones and what a average price should be for certain stones. This price seems fair to me but anyone else have any input?

I would have preferred to buy the stone locally, in Chicago, so I can see the stone in person. Has anyone had problems with this dealer before?
Click to expand...

Excellent dealer but ask them for magnified images of the stone as well as an idealscope image. Post those and we'll give you opinions. The numbers on the GIA report look good.
 
The numbers look good but I wouldn't be happy with the indented naturals, which is like having a tiny bit of the stone missing along the girdle.
 
@diamondseeker2006 - I have sent a request for the images but the problems Plummiecat mentioned have my worried about this stone.

@plummiecat - Never even though about the indented naturals, thanks for the heads up.

Didn't realize how few stones there with the specifications I'm looking for.
 
diamondseeker2006|1352493098|3302029 said:
The problem to me with paying the premium of going over 1.5 cts is that that stone faces up small. I'd want a 1.5 ct. diamond to be 7.4mm in diameter or very close to it. There are lots of ideal cut diamonds around. Don't limit yourself to just those two,.
Click to expand...


this
 
Here is another stone that I was looking at and had a question about:

http://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-1-36-E-color-GIA-certified/D-D1W5MK

HCA score comes to 0.6. My question is why does HCA say a score of 1.5 might be more desirable then 0.5?

A score below 2 (Excellent) means you have eliminated known poor performers (more than 95% of all diamonds). Your own personal preference may be for a diamond with an HCA score of 1.5 more rather than one with a lower score of say 0.5.

Read more: https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca#ixzz2C22BOhGs
Click to expand...

I know this diamond doesn't fall into the ideal range because the table is a little bigger and depth is shorter but they are very close. Seems like a good value at this price and specifications. Anyone see something I am missing? I have requested a detailed image and idealscope if available.
 
Here is another stone that looks interesting. Once again the numbers do not fall in the optimal ranges but has a excellent HCA score and cheapest of the 3.

r07366.jpg

Any thoughts on which of these 3 stones looks the best?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top