shape
carat
color
clarity

Comparison of 2 MMDs

vetrik

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
140
I’m in the process of creating a new ring set - my original engagement ring and wedding band fit most of the year, but I haven’t been able to wear them the last few summers. When I found the only other setting I’ve dreamed of on EBay for a good price in a larger ring size, I thought the time may be right to finally buy it and have rings to wear in the summer (since I didn’t really want to resize my original rings).

However, this wasn’t really planned and we’re building a house, so I have to keep it pretty affordable. I thought I would do moissanite, but I didn’t love it when I ordered one. I was pretty excited to see how lab diamonds had become more affordable in the last few years (I was interested in them when I got engaged in 2002, but there was definitely no price savings over mined at that time!).

Using Rare Carat search, I noticed that Dimend Scaasi had some pretty good prices. I jumped on one, although I was aware it wasn’t the best cut. After it came, I was second guessing myself on the cut, and I noticed one that came up on Rare Carat that had better numbers and looked good in the video. Their customer service is great.

I had never had a chance to compare diamonds where literally the main difference is cut, and it was very interesting!

I needed to stay close to 6mm, since that’s the size the setting takes. The two stones are:

.86 E SI1 $892 (on the top)
IGI Cert
6.22x6.26x3.63
Table 63%
Depth 58.3%
Crown 33%
Pavilion 41%
HCA 2.1

.79 E VVS2 $810 (on the bottom)
GCAL Cert
5.91 x 5.94 x 3.64
Table 57%
Depth 61.4%
Crown 35.5%
Pavilion 40.6%
HCA 1.2

Also - the band is a14k
1/2 carat lab diamond band from New World Diamonds (F-G, VS-SI). I paid $314 and I’m really happy with it.

02E310F9-DB45-43EB-8EFD-D296F5446159.jpeg
F93C3877-CE4A-4063-ADC8-CA7BD9CBDB18.jpeg
28D1122C-9901-48F8-8E06-BE727AD00E42.jpeg

3 videos in shade, full sun, and inside:

 
Last edited:
Thank you for sharing pictures! I have just a basic untrained eye, but the difference in cut jumped right out at me. This was very helpful!
 
The one on the bottom is soooooo much better (IMHO). The clear arrows and contrast make it stand out to me, whereas the top one is very poorly cut
 
The bottom one (.79) 100%! Much prettier to my eyes. How fun to get to see the two side by side!

That band is lovely as well. =)
 
Ooo pretty! Would love to see the setting it’s going into!
 
Thank you for the excellent videos!

Really useful to see the comparisons next to each other and in the same lighting environments :))
 
It is interesting to compare them - I knew the .86 was poorly cut, but it didn’t seem like it looked that bad on its own. Then I opened the .79 and it was immediately clear how much better it looked in every way. Really proved the “cut is king” saying. I’m obviously sending the .86 back on Monday. I’ve tested my family and they’ve all preferred the .79 also. Just a bonus that it’s also cheaper!

Not the best picture, but I haven’t taken many of the setting yet - it’s a platinum Scott Kay with two .09 ct stones and eight .02 carat. My original wedding ring is a platinum Scott Kay band so this matches really well when I wear those together. It’s just has a placeholder cz from the jeweler, I’m so anxious to get it reset!

851DACB9-D6A3-49C8-9CB7-27539C09377E.jpeg
 
Nice comparison and makes it so obvious which cut is better.

Your new setting is very pretty. It already looks a little tight to me (how does it feel?). You might want to have it sized up slightly when you
have the stone set.

Either way, come back with pics please!
 
Very quick update since I just picked it up - the .86 is officially returned and the .79 is set in my ring (it was resized - I hate tight rings!). It looks great!

883EEBF6-F1B5-4EB5-ABED-35355DE12750.jpeg
 
Looks beautiful!
 
That looks like it is performing really well! Congrats! :))
 
It looks perfect - enjoy your beautiful new ring!
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP

Featured Topics

Top