Diamond size, please help!

[musbursa]

Hello-

I am trying to decide between two diamonds. The thing I am wondering is how much bigger the larger diamond would actually look once it is set, I am planning on getting a setting with pear sidestones. The two diamonds measure....

6.84-6.81-4.25 (1.22 carats) (7,103)

6.69-6.66-4.01 (1.08 carats) (6,000)

They are both round brilliants.

I wuold appreciate your help.

 

[neatfreak]

They say that you don''t really notice a difference unless it''s more than 1/2mm OR the diamond is really small.

So I don''t think there would be a big difference in size once they are set IMO.

 

[joker382]

I am by no means a pro at this, as I am still learning and reading this stuff. But I have constantly read that your ring size will affect the look of the diamond significantly. I have seen pictures of people with tiny ring sizes and their 1 ct or 1.25 ct looks huge while larger ring sizes will have less coverage of your finger and the diamond may appear smaller on your finger. A jeweler also told me that any side stones will or bands with other diamonds take away from the center stone and can also make it appear smaller. (Not that I agree because I am in the process of getting a split shank pave setting because I think it is beautiful) Just my thought and others that I have read!

 

[musbursa]

Thank your for your help. So in your opinon is the slightly larger diamond worth the extra $1000?

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 7/10/2007 10:43:53 PM
Author: musbursa
Thank your for your help. So in your opinon is the slightly larger diamond worth the extra $1000?

Not for the size difference you're getting. You're only getting an extra 1/10th of a mm that will be visible. But that's just my opinion!

 

[dod]

Date: 7/10/2007 11:00:30 PM
Author: neatfreak

Not for the size difference you''re getting. You''re only getting an extra 1/10th of a mm that will be visible. But that''s just my opinion!

I agree with Neatfreak (all other dimensions being equal)... too much squeeze for the juice!

 

[joker382]

are you sure it''s only 1/10 of a mm, that seems extremely small, and I believe it is larger than that? But i am not sure, and I would love for clarification.

 

[dod]

It''s actually 15/100 mm, but at that size, you''ll never see the difference.

 

[musbursa]

I appreciate your help! Thank you so much!

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 7/10/2007 11:07:26 PM
Author: joker382
are you sure it''s only 1/10 of a mm, that seems extremely small, and I believe it is larger than that? But i am not sure, and I would love for clarification.

Just check out the measurements. The first two are how big it will look face up, in millimeters. The last one is the depth, which you won''t see. So it''s a difference of about .15mm (so I was a bit off), but still isn''t worth it. Would you want to pay $1,000 for .15mm?

 

[snlee]

On the hand in a 3 stone setting, I doubt you''d be able to see a difference. I would save the 1k and spend it on the side stones.

 

[Harleigh]

I don''t think that that small of a difference is at all worth an extra $1K. I would keep looking around if you want a significantly larger stone or put the extra money into side stones if you prefer. Just my opinion...

 

[joker382]

thanks for the clarification....i''m always learning new stuff

 

[Lorelei]

Another vote for the difference not being worth it!

 

[Nicki]

Spend the extra $1k on a super nice setting instead!