Comments on this RADIANT stone please!!!

[1rarebird]

Hi all:

I have been trolling the site for a year or so & have learned much here...big THANK YOU...

Now I need opinions.

Radiant cut 2.01 carat 7.25x7.17x5.12
NON BRANDED/GENERIC
GIA CERT.
Depth 71.4
Table 73
Girdle thin to v. thin
Culet none
Polish good
Symmetry good
Clarity SI1
Color F
Fluorescence none
$$$17,353.00 American

Stone is very eye clean & sparkles great.

My concern is depth & table are NOT what the reading says is "Ideal" (59-69)&
I''m wondering if the price might be high given that the stone falls out of the "Ideal"

I don''t want to overpay & the "Ideal" specs have me spooked...

RADIANT owners & fans...please can U help a guy out?

Thanx: 1rarebird

 

[Elagabalus]

My jeweller told me that the ideal table for a diamond is 53 to 54 %, the site that is trying to sell you the diamond is lying to you. How can 10% variation between 59 to 69 percent be ideal? There is a huge difference between 59 and 69%.

 

[Elagabalus]

My advice is to shop around. Compare stones.

 

[JulieN]

Elagabalus, you should note that this is a radiant stone, and not a round.

Also, even on a round, the ideal table is not 53-54. That is within ideal, but not the end all and be all of ideal tables.

 

[JulieN]

1rarebird, could you get an Ideal Scope picture? Is that girdle very thin? or very thick?

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 7/8/2006 6:06:34 PM
Author: Elagabalus
My jeweller told me that the ideal table for a diamond is 53 to 54 %, the site that is trying to sell you the diamond is lying to you. How can 10% variation between 59 to 69 percent be ideal? There is a huge difference between 59 and 69%.

It's a radiant, not a RB. Big difference.

And ideal tables are not just 53 to 54. Can go as high as a 57

 

[kcoursolle]

Hi there rarebird,
As far as this radiant goes, I think it is a bit too deep for my taste. It will make the diamond appear smaller than it''s carat weight. Most radiants in my opinion are cut excessively deep, it''s hard to find one in that ideal 60-65% depth range.

However, if you have seen this diamond and love it...then it might be the one for you despite being outside of the ideal range. I would definitely look at some more before you decide.

 

[coda72]

I would pass on this stone for sure. Besides it being too deep and the table being too large, the girdle is too thin. There are no ideal standards for radiants, but depth and table in the low to mid sixties seem to produce the best looking stones.