Final Choices, Which Would You Pick?

[zman8]

Which would you recommend, all are around $8,000 (also if that is too much for these rocks, please let me know)?
Do you have any other recommendations that would be better?

Choice 1:
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.29
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 62.2%
Table: 55.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium, faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.96*7.00*4.34

Choice 2:
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 60.4%
Table: 56.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: 1.0 to 3.7
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.94*6.96*4.20
Crown Angle: 34.2°
Crown %: 15.0
pavilion Angle: 40.6°
pavilion %: 42.70

Choice 3:
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.17
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 62.0%
Table: 54.6%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to medium
Culet: ID
Fluorescence: Neglible
Measurements: 6.73*6.75*4.18
Crown Angle: 34.5°
Crown %: 15.60
pavilion Angle: 40.7°
pavilion %: 42.90

Thanks.

 

[Mrs W]

Can't tell you about choice #1 bc no angles....between 2 and 3 tho, i may have to go with 3 but they both score great on the HCA....so its really up to you. Have you seen them? If you have pick the one you like best...

 

[zman8]

Date: 12/3/2008 3:38:11 PM
Author: Mrs W
Can''t tell you about choice #1 bc no angles....between 2 and 3 tho, i many have to go with 3 but they both score great on the HCA....so its really up to you. Have you seen them? If you have pick the one you like best...

Well I''ve seen them both online, and number 2 seems to "speak" more to me, but wanted to get a gen opinion before I took the plunge, and to ensure that I am making a good decision.

 

[Mrs W]

Well if #2 speaks to you then get that one.....the #s are great on it too

 

[:)]

need angles on #1


wanna save a few $?
AGS0 check if eyeclean 1.16 E Si2 $6380
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/E-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1195057.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

I really like this one..$7470 E si1 1.17
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/E-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1193937.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

and really like this one

$7640 1.24 F si2
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5205/

 

[zman8]

Just received angles on Choice 1:

Measurements: 6.94*7.00*4.34
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown %: 15.5
pavilion Angle: 40.8°
pavilion %: 43.0

 

[Dancing Fire]

just going by #''s....i like #3

 

[puravida]

just wondering...for the first one, it says its a GIA Ideal cut. Is this correct? I thought the top cut grade for GIA was excellent. But I could be wrong as I''m still trying to beef up my diamond know-how. Comments?

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 12/3/2008 8:15:27 PM
Author: puravida
just wondering...for the first one, it says its a GIA Ideal cut. Is this correct? I thought the top cut grade for GIA was excellent. But I could be wrong as I''m still trying to beef up my diamond know-how. Comments?

It is excellent. The vendor has decided to call it ideal...

 

[puravida]

Thanks, neatfreak. Good to know

 

[zman8]

So I should be weary of the First one?

 

[:)]

#s look good on #1, but the stone looks cleaner than I would expect an SI1 to look (at least at 8x)
The report is not available - does your copy read ''clouds not shown''? If yes, ask what the grade setting inclusion is, and if clouds are the grade setter.
Ask for an IS pic.

 

[zman8]

Date: 12/4/2008 12:36:16 AM
Author:
#s look good on #1, but the stone looks cleaner than I would expect an SI1 to look (at least at 8x)

The report is not available - does your copy read ''clouds not shown''? If yes, ask what the grade setting inclusion is, and if clouds are the grade setter.

Ask for an IS pic.

Yes it does read "could not shown." How should I proceed? How does this affect the stone?

 

[zman8]

Okay, about to pull the trigger, and just wanted to get the general opinions out there:

What do we think of this stone:
Choice 2:
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Ideal
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 60.4%
Table: 56.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: 1.0 to 3.7
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.94*6.96*4.20
Crown Angle: 34.2°
Crown %: 15.0
pavilion Angle: 40.6°
pavilion %: 42.70


With This Setting:
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/settings-with-sidestones/ring/item_58-285_design.asp?module=setting

 

[zman8]

Bump for any last opinions.

Thanks.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/5/2008 9:00:03 AM
Author: zman8
Bump for any last opinions.

Thanks.

Looks great!

 

[:)]

Hey Z, did you ask him if the clouds were affecting the clarity/were the grade setter? I would just make sure you checked that prior to pulling the trigger. Make sure you at least have it on hold while you check this.

 

[zman8]

Date: 12/5/2008 10:55:24 AM
Author:
Hey Z, did you ask him if the clouds were affecting the clarity/were the grade setter? I would just make sure you checked that prior to pulling the trigger. Make sure you at least have it on hold while you check this.

I am going to have them check this for me. What would you mean by the "grade setter"? Also, what should I do if it is? The AGS report does state "Florescence: Negligible Additional Clouds are Not Shown."

 

[:)]

What I was worried about, is if the ''grade setter'' (meaning the inclusion giving the stone its SI grade as opposed to a VS2 grade) was a cloud(s), there is a possibility of a foggy appearance (caused by the clouds) to the stone. If he says the clouds set the grade, then ask if the clouds affect the visual appearance of the stone.
The ''clouds not shown'' means they did not plot it on the clarity plot. THis is a common practice because plotting clouds can make the clarity plot look terrible (and take a long time to plot!). Just because there are clouds does not mean that the stone is at risk for this, but Garry has brought up a few times that this can be an issue with stones that got their SI grade from clouds - so, best to check!

 

[zman8]

Date: 12/5/2008 11:17:45 AM
Author:
What I was worried about, is if the ''grade setter'' (meaning the inclusion giving the stone its SI grade as opposed to a VS2 grade) was a cloud(s), there is a possibility of a foggy appearance (caused by the clouds) to the stone. If he says the clouds set the grade, then ask if the clouds affect the visual appearance of the stone.

The ''clouds not shown'' means they did not plot it on the clarity plot. THis is a common practice because plotting clouds can make the clarity plot look terrible (and take a long time to plot!). Just because there are clouds does not mean that the stone is at risk for this, but Garry has brought up a few times that this can be an issue with stones that got their SI grade from clouds - so, best to check!

The stone I have decided on is the 1.22 VS2 (see Choice 2 in original post, and a picture in a further post). Since it is a VS2 is this less an issue?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/5/2008 11:30:39 AM
Author: zman8

Date: 12/5/2008 11:17:45 AM
Author:
What I was worried about, is if the ''grade setter'' (meaning the inclusion giving the stone its SI grade as opposed to a VS2 grade) was a cloud(s), there is a possibility of a foggy appearance (caused by the clouds) to the stone. If he says the clouds set the grade, then ask if the clouds affect the visual appearance of the stone.

The ''clouds not shown'' means they did not plot it on the clarity plot. THis is a common practice because plotting clouds can make the clarity plot look terrible (and take a long time to plot!). Just because there are clouds does not mean that the stone is at risk for this, but Garry has brought up a few times that this can be an issue with stones that got their SI grade from clouds - so, best to check!

The stone I have decided on is the 1.22 VS2 (see Choice 2 in original post, and a picture in a further post). Since it is a VS2 is this less an issue?

Yes.

 

[:)]

Z, I am so sorry, I didn''t realize it was a different stone, I was going too fast, I remembered you and had in my mind to check in on the cloud issue and scanned too quickly.
VS2 no worries.
Snap it up!
Congrats!

 

[zman8]

Thanks for the approval everyone!!