Budgeting: Sacrifice Clarity or Color?

[EE3]

Hello! My BF and I went diamond browsing yesterday and we''re looking to stick around $8k for the finished ring. I would love a 1.25ct RB--do you think this is realistic? The setting I want is pretty intricate, and even custom-made, it''ll probably be around $1500. (wheat engraving, bead set cathedral, milgrain, 18k white gold).

Our jeweler found 1ct diamonds for $6,000 with the following specs:

1. Ideal Cut (GIA/AGS)
Triple 0 (ID /polish/sym/flour)
1.01ct
F color
SI1

1. Ideal Cut (GIA/AGS)
Triple 0 (ID /polish/sym/flour)
1.04ct
G color
VS2

I know to get a >1ct diamond for around $7k, I''ll need to sacrifice either the color or the clarity. If you had to choose between a G color, VS2 or an F color SI1, which would you recommend?

TIA!

 

[chrono]

The SI1 is eye clean, right?
What is the physical dimensions of both? Are they pretty much identical?
I'd probably take the cheaper one if everything else is equal.

 

[dps777]

I am a proponent of the eye-clean SI1''s!

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

I have a 1.06 H SI2 (eyeclean) and it's GORGEOUS (but an oval cut)! The setting has a total of .55 ct H SI prong-set stones in 18k white gold halo setting. So total weight is 1.61 carats. The total cost of the ring was about $5500. I definitely think you can do what you want for $8k if you don't mind compromising on the clarity. Notice I'm not saying SACRIFICE because I don't believe it has to be a sacrifice. If you can find an eye-clean SI2 with inclusions that do no pose a risk to the structural integrity of the stone, then I say go for it.

 

[leapinghorse]

I would look for an eyeclean SI1 with H color. If you find an SI2 that is eyeclean all the better! Don''t pay more for a higher grading that you won''t be able to spot any difference.

 

[Hera]

Go for that 1.25! Drop to H or I and an eye clean SI2. It may take a little more effort, but it''ll be worth it!

 

[EE3]

Thanks for the advice guys

. I guess I''ll just have to look at them in person and see which ones I like better.

 

[leapinghorse]

Just as a note - I paid $6200 for a 1.32 H color SI2 diamond that is brilliant. I can''t take my eyes off it (although I will be proposing tomorrow so I will have to give it up!).

I did do a lot of searching using the pricescope "price comparison" search and looked at a lot of certificates and inquired about many stones, but the search was worth it. I got tremendous value for the money. I remember considering a couple of 1.38-1.40 stones that were great and were around $7500 which would be in your budget (both were H and SI1)

 

[Kay]

I am a big fan of eye-clean SI1 and SI2 stones. I would rather put my money toward color I can see than clarity I can''t. Of course, having an excellent cut is my first priority. Of the two options you posted, assuming they are both excellent cut and similar in price, I would choose F/SI1 over G/VS2. However, you probably would see much difference between F & G so I would look for the largest ideal cut F or G and SI1 or SI2 in your budget.

This one is close to your ideal size and in your budget. I would call and ask Whiteflash if it is eyeclean.

1.21 carat, F, SI2 for $6,455 (less with the Pricescope disount if you pay by wire transfer): http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-50512.htm#

 

[EE3]

wow! Thanks Kay! That is a really good price and definitely within the budget. It is a GIA Ideal, but not a triple 0. If I had either a smaller (like 1-1.10 ct) triple 0/H&F vs this GIA 1.21ct ideal for the same price...what would everyone choose?

Sorry for all the questions..I''m love love LOVE how everyone is so nice and helpful around here!

 

[esumsea]

Date: 9/27/2007 12:10:45 PM
Author: ItsMsPlease
Sorry for all the questions..I''m love love LOVE how everyone is so nice and helpful around here!

Yeah I love this place also. Everyone is SO nice and helpful. I think you have been given good advice. You may be able to hide inclusions but if you are color sensitive you will never be able to hide the color. THe more faceted the cut, though, the lower you can go in color and get away with it.

Good Luck!
Mario

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 9/27/2007 12:10:45 PM
Author: ItsMsPlease
wow! Thanks Kay! That is a really good price and definitely within the budget. It is a GIA Ideal, but not a triple 0. If I had either a smaller (like 1-1.10 ct) triple 0/H&F vs this GIA 1.21ct ideal for the same price...what would everyone choose?

Sorry for all the questions..I''m love love LOVE how everyone is so nice and helpful around here!

The stone that Kay posted looks FABULOUS! I''d for sure inquire about that one!

FWIW, I have a G VS2 and an F SI1 and they both look impeccable. The first is GIA excellent and the second is a WF ACA stone. With future purchases, I''m always going to include SI stones in my search! I read in the newspaper (non-Pricescope bias) that the BEST diamond for the dollar is the F SI1 and I believe it.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 9/27/2007 12:24:03 PM
Author: esumsea

Yeah I love this place also. Everyone is SO nice and helpful. I think you have been given good advice. You may be able to hide inclusions but if you are color sensitive you will never be able to hide the color. THe more faceted the cut, though, the lower you can go in color and get away with it.

Good Luck!
Mario

Hi,
This is true when comparing certain cuts - like a round brilliant has more facets than an asscher so it''ll hide color better. . .but with round brilliants compared to round brilliants will not mean one will hide color better. It really comes down to the angles and percentages NOT the number of facets. (I''m not sure what stone shapes you''re comparing here, but the OP is looking at rounds, so I thought I''d just chime in a bit

)

 

[denverappraiser]

‘Sacrifice’ really is a pretty ugly word but this process often involves making compromises in order to say within a budget. You’re getting good advice but I do have a few questions though:

You call both stones Ideal Cut (GIA/AGS). GIA doesn’t use this term and AGS uses it in a very specific way. What is your source of this information?

'Triple 0' is an AGS term that is not used by GIA at all and AGS doesn’t use it to refer to polish/sym/fluor. Where did this information come from?

Is the grading for color and clarity from the same source as the above?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Steel]

I follow with major opinion, dropping clarity is not a big deal. If you genuinely cannot see any inclusion or are happy with any you can see or hide then go for it. Unless you are obsessive with an ultrasonic cleaner your ring will look like an SI or I at some point during the day/week/month anyway

.

I love the higher colours and would encourage anybody to look their direction. Particularly D or E's. Yum.

In retrospect I would have bought a bigger stone and put it in a cheap setting for a year or so. The cost of the setting might bump you up at the moment into a bigger or better category of diamond that you might not be able to afford otherwise. The benefits of this are twofold as I see, firstly that you and your SO may not ever want to upgrade your original diamond, for sentimental reasons; here you get the bigger one now. Secondly the money for a setting can be found later on, perhaps you may even change your mind, but it is hard to find the money for an upgrade - esp considering your expectation may have grown by the time you have the $.

Downside to this is that you may want to choose a wedding band now and want to lock down your choice now?

Hummmh. Just a suggestion!

_____________

ETA:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-171976.htm

I have loved the look of this one, sweet colour and price. WF will say how the inclusion looks?

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-50512.htm

This is cute too, just check on the smaller table and flour. Cute?

My 2 cents.

 

[Kay]

Date: 9/27/2007 12:10:45 PM
Author: ItsMsPlease
wow! Thanks Kay! That is a really good price and definitely within the budget. It is a GIA Ideal, but not a triple 0. If I had either a smaller (like 1-1.10 ct) triple 0/H&F vs this GIA 1.21ct ideal for the same price...what would everyone choose?

Sorry for all the questions..I''m love love LOVE how everyone is so nice and helpful around here!

Denverappraiser is right -- you are not using the term triple 0 quite right. Here is a tutorial that explains it very well: http://www.goodoldgold.com/classic.php?page=ags_000.htm
(See also: http://www.americangemsociety.org/faq-detail.php?faqid=67430)

In short, AGS "triple ideal" means it has ideal cut proportions, polish and symmetry. Fluorescence is not a factor. Faint blue fluorescence will not have a negative effect; in fact, it probably won''t be noticeable. Several of us have colorless diamonds with medium to strong blue fluor and love how it makes the diamond seem even whiter/crisper.

AGS 000 means the stone is a triple ideal for cut, plus the highest color (D) and clarity (flawless / internally flawless) grades. So you are not really looking at triple 000 stones.

The stone I posted is GIA excellent for polish and symmetry. That''s the highest grade GIA gives and is equivalent to AGS ideal for those factors. I do not know if it would get an ideal proportion score from AGS because I do not know those numbers. It does have a very nice ideal scope pattern and would probably be gorgeous. I would ask someone at Whiteflash to look at it and give you their opinion. If WF gives it the thumbs up, I would probably choose a stone like that over a noticeably smaller AGS triple ideal.

Here are a couple of AGS triple ideal stones that are in a similar price range but are a little bit smaller (1.11-1.12):
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-49732.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-48626.htm

 

[EE3]

Yikes--I am sure I have it all mixed up. hehe..that''s what I get for trying to use terms I am not familiar with! The jeweler told me that a Triple 0 was equivalent to a H&F in terms of perfect proportions...and beyond that, I got everything else mixed up.

Thank you all so much for your help and information!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Do you mean H&A (hearts and arrows)?

 

[Kay]

Date: 9/27/2007 5:38:17 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Do you mean H&A (hearts and arrows)?

Or HOF -- Hearts on Fire (aka "Wallets on Fire"), which is a brand of H&A diamonds

H&A stones are not always AGS triple ideal and vice versa. However, either is likely to be a beautiful diamond.