Choosing a Diamond (w/ images this time)

[OPA Rocks]

Hey everyone,

I have my diamond choices down to two stones. Long story short, I am between a 1.22 H SI1 and an 1.25 I SI1. I have idealscope and 40x zoom for the H color stone, and only 40x zoom for the I color stone (they are from two different places).

Here are the numbers on the stones:

Carat Color Clarity GIRD Pol Sym Cut Depth Table CrwnAng PavAng HCA Cost
1.22 H SI1 M-STK vg vg ex 61.4 56.9 34.2 40.9 1.4 $5,788 6.85x6.90x4.22
1.25 I SI1 TN-M vg vg vg 59.7 57 33.5 40.8 0.8 $5,580 7.01x7.03x4.19

I have been very open with both of my sales reps. The H color stone is from White Flash. It is a virtual stone I had brought in. They have recommended the stone and my rep says if it were an in-house stone it would fall into their Expert Selection range. The I color stone is from Cut Rate Diamonds. The are a wholesaler, and do not provide IS images. My rep insists that my girlfriend won''t see the color difference once set, but that she will see the larger spread. I know without an IS image of the larger stone it is difficult to judge, but I would still love any feedback, even if it is just approval or disapproval of the smaller stone.

I have one more question. If I get the larger stone, I still would like to have IS images and such, and I am thinking about taking it to PGS (Professional Gem Sciences) here in Chicago. It would probably run about $100 to get an IS, Sarin, and maybe even an laser inscription. If I go with the WF stone, I already have the IS and Sarin, so I really don''t want to pay for it again, but is it still a good idea to get some kind of verification of the stone? Does anyone know of a place in Chicago that I can have this done for less than the pricey PGS?

Thanks again for your help! Wish me luck!

OPA

 

[OPA Rocks]

The First one was the 40x for the 1.22 H. This is the IS for the 1.22 H.

 

[OPA Rocks]

This is the 40x for the 1.25 I.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My preference would be the H stone from WF, because I think it has a better cut. I did not have my stones from them rechecked. They came with an AGS cert and an insurance valuation report, so I saw no need to have a third opinion.

 

[strmrdr]

hmmmm this is a tough one.
Are both eyeclean?
Will WF apply their upgrade policy to the stone?
If so go with that one.
Both look like very good diamonds.

 

[somethingshiny]

I think both stones are lovely, in pictures, but I would go with the H from Whiteflash. One of the reasons is because of your "salesman" from the other place. There will be very little noticeable difference (if any) in spread once the stone is set. Also, the H is the better color with the better cut. I think it will out-perform the I stone.

Good Luck!

BTW-Monarch is from Chicago. Maybe she''ll stop by and offer you advice on places in your area.

 

[strmrdr]

https://www.pricescope.com/appraisers_IL.aspx
Chicago area appraiser

 

[risingsun]

The WF diamond has better color and a better cut. That would be my choice.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Date: 10/17/2007 11:19:59 PM
Author: risingsun
The WF diamond has better color and a better cut. That would be my choice.

ditto. no way that .1mm (2% longer diameter I believe?) and 3.5% savings outweighs both cut and color.

Especially not when you throw in the extra information to verify performance of the diamond, and the reliability of and proven honesty of Whiteflash. Pretty easy decision in my mind.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

ooops, double post