Engagement ring - help selecting a stone!

[cushiond]

Hi all,

I would really appreciate some help picking a stone! I am looking to buy from Blue Nile and have been reading around the forum to understand what things to look out for. Like everyone I want to pick a great stone, but there is just so much choice!

So far I have decided to look for something in the 1.05 - 1.20 ct range and VS2 clarity, as long as it’s ‘eye clean’.

I am looking to set the stone in this ring:
https://www.bluenile.com/uk/build-y...diamond-engagement-ring-18k-yellow-gold_51603

For colour, since it’s a yellow gold setting, I think I can look in the H-J range. However I want to make sure the centre stone is whiter than the side stones (I) so think H is probably the way to go. Please let me know if you think otherwise!

I have used a combination of diamondscreener.com and the HCA test to narrow down the vast selection to a few options:

1) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD12566895 (1.06ct, HCA 1.2)
2) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD12566764 (1.08ct, HCA 1.1)
3) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD12730184 (1.10ct, HCA 1.5)
4) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD12462926 (1.10ct, HCA 1.9 / average)
5) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD12621018 (1.11ct, HCA 1.4)

Or I could even consider dropping a colour grade and going for an “Astor Ideal”:

6) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD09907275 (1.06ct, HCA 0.9)
7) https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD09781833(1.11ct, HCA 1.0)
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD09789417(1.13ct, HCA 1.0)

Between these, I really don’t know how to pick. Are there any obvious winners/losers in this list? Are there any tips for narrowing the list down further?

Thanks for any help or advice!
JJ

 

[lovedogs]

Typically, "Astor ideals" are overpriced for what they are. Sometimes less so, but I wouldn't pay more or drop significantly in color/clarity for one.

I'll look through the others on this list. Is there any reason you need vs2 clarity, or are you open to eye clean SI1?

 

[cushiond]

@lovedogs thanks for taking a look!

Yes I am open to eye clean SI1 too. There wasn't really any particular reason I was looking at VS2 other than it sounded less risky...

 

[lovedogs]

No to the 1.15 because the crown is too steep, so without an ASET/IS image it's a bit risky.
I think my favorite is the 1.06 because it has proportions within the safe ranges and doesn't have additional clouds. None of the others are bad by any means, but "additional clouds and pinpoints" seems less great than just "pinpoints not shown".

Obviously I'm nitpicking, but if I had to choose that's what I would go with.

 

[sledge]

My ramblings below. I'd be enticed with 1 or 2 personally.

1. Ideal proportions. 56 table, 61.7 depth, 34.5/40.8 and 75 LGF. Small crystal on table but looks clear/whitish (near 7 o'clock position in video). Got a smidge extra depth in the med-sl thick girdle but still acceptable.

2. Ideal proportions. 56 table, 61.2 depth, 34.5/40.8 and 75 LGF. Several clouds on the table and a small crystal. Neither look problematic but I prefer as little on the table as possible. Around 3 o'clock you can see the crystal in the video but it looks clear/whitish. The girdle is more ideal at medium thickness, which accounts for the 0.5% reduction in depth.

3. Again falls within ideal proportion range. 56 table, 61.9 depth, 35/40.8 and 75 LGF. My biggest complaint here is I've seen too many 35/40.8 combos with leakage in the ASET. Doesn't mean this stone has the problem but unless you can get an ASET or don't have better options then I see no reason to take the risk. IMO, 1 or 2 are better and less risky options.

4. Could potentially work. 58 table, 62.2 depth, 36 crown, 40.6 pavilion & 75 LGF. I prefer a 54-56 table but 58 is acceptable. Small table means larger upper facets which is where rainbow light is produced. That said high crowns throw good fire too and although 36 is a little steep its paired with a very complimentary shallow 40.6 pavilion. You have extra weight in the sl thick girdle and there is a cluster of inclusions on the table that probably isn't a problem but I very much dislike. I'd want an ASET or IS image before committing and frankly see no reason for the risk when you have better candidates.

5. Similar comments as #3. Also while very trivial I dislike the 6.66 dimension. Others may like it.

6. Not worth a price premium or color drop to me. Stone has okay proportions. Its pulling a lower HCA because of the slightly larger 57 table, shallow 34 crown and shallow 60.5 depth. The 40.8 pavilion should play nicely with the 34 crown. However, I don't like the 80 LGFs either. This stone isn't bad but it's not my preference as the personality will be different and exhibit a little more white light return vs bigger bolder rainbow flashes.

7. More intriguing but again not worth a drop to J color for me.

8. I just don't see much value in the Astor line, and don't like the color drop. Also not a fan of the 33.5/41 combo. This stone does have a 57 table and 60.5 depth which is near a 60/60 style stone and some find desirable. Things I worry about with a 41 pavilion is making sure none of the 8 actual pavilions don't push the into the 41.2 range as odd things happen when they do. I know a few people that seek a 34/41 combo as their favorite but also reject 99% of them as a great one is difficult to find.

 

[cushiond]

Thanks so much @lovedogs and @sledge that's super insightful!

I'll go for either 1 or 2 then, and will avoid the Astor line - it does feel better sticking to H for color Interesting about the higher risk of leakage with various combos, thanks for the expert knowledge there, I will definitely choose to avoid the unnecessary risk!