Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Final round. Which diamond should I choose?

B

benjw

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
11
The engagement ring search has actually been very fun. I'm onto the final round of decisions.
What are your thoughts on the following three? I especially want to see what has the best value, since they're all at very different price points.

2.322 ct I VS2 A CUT ABOVE $24,181
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4023505.htm
This diamond is between the other two on this list. Probably has the best proportions out of the three. Is it at a good price, though? I don't want to pay a premium for VS2 when I really only care about the diamond being eye clean. It's also so close in price to the 2.528ct one that I might as well get the bigger rock.

2.528 ct I SI1 A CUT ABOVE $24,912
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3959046.htm
Most expensive but an eye-clean SI1 usually provides good value. Table is larger. Does this suggest more brilliance rather than fire? Is the difference negligible?

2.003 ct I SI1 Expert Selection $16,845
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2936493.htm
Amazing price point, but am I sacrificing too much in terms of light performance? It's hard for me to judge. I don't mind a 2c diamond at all. My wife-to-be would honestly be happy with a 2c diamond, so the carat isn't an issue. If this is a good buy in the end, I would save tons of money without sacrificing much.

Here is WhiteFlash's comparison page, The diamonds are in the same order as the list above.

TIA!!!
Screen Shot 2018-11-03 at 12.33.27 PM.png
 
If it were me I would go for the first one. The second one is larger, and I realize that WF calls it eye clean, but I would (personally) want a photo of the first 2 stones on someone's hands to see a "real life" view. I worry a little about the inclusions, because I am not sensitive to SI1s usually but can readily see the inclusions in the video.

I think the 3rd one should be out if you can afford one of the first two. It's not a bad stone, but I strongly prefer the first two. They are both bigger and better cut IMHO.

I lean strongly towards the first option, but I think seeing real world pics of the first 2 would help a lot.
 
I agree with @lovedogs! Unless you are really keen to get past the 2.5 mark, the 2.32 looks lovely.
 
Good for you, choosing between these diamonds is an awesome problem to have!!. The plot on the Stone that Rocky shared should definitely put it in the running. Probably the best of the bunch all around.
Have you asked your WF associate to pull all of the options & give you their opinion on best performance & eye cleanliness to your standards?
If the ACAs are top 1% of cut in the world then what's the ES? I really don't know how big of a difference you'd notice IRL. You have a better idea in your head if that best of the best mind clean is worth the 8k jump in price.
 
I really like the first choice a lot. VS2 clarity, very small table and great proportions. It will have lots of fire!

Also I like the alternate one @rockysalamander tossed into the mix. Super clean and nearly the same proportions. Table is a little smaller on the first, which I prefer myself.

I actually think that is a decent ES; however the size is considerably different. Also I don't like the 58 table personally. Looking at your first choice against the ES or the 2.5ct and those seem "flat" to me in comparison to the first.

That said there is an $8k price difference between the ES and first choice . Is the size and extra sparkle worth the money? Hands down I think the ACA is the better performer and your "10". In your head how does the ES compare?

I'd echo thoughts to have WF pull all 4 stones and compare against one another. The size should be obvious in some of them. I'd also be curious about color as we know their is a sliding scale in I color. Lastly I'd like to know about clarity and which one talks most to human eyes. I think you will get back to the first choice or Rocky's choice.
 
My choice would be the first one, but it mainly is because I like VS2 clarity and higher. It all depends on the preferences of the recipient. If the largest possible diamond is the top preference, then obviously the second stone would make more sense. But for me, I'd sacrifice the extra size because I want the better clarity. I don't feel that the third stone is even in the category with the other two because it is in a totally difference price range.
 
#1
 
Have you seen similar diamonds in person?

A word of caution, I recently saw a few color grades in person of similar round sizes (1.66-1.74) for I, H, G, and F. Couldn't tell between the G and F, could definitely tell the I -- and the H was closer to the G than the I due to a good cut. My gf has a better eye for color and knocked out the H from contention when I had her peeking at 1ct for the same color grades. Maybe my gf is just picky when it comes to color, maybe she can tell better than I could. For me, I'm more sensitive to inclusions (she wasn't) and less for the color grades.

The one I think I've settled upon (with PS help!) is a round 1.876 G vs1. Almost the same budget. If you're good with the color, I'd certainly go with the #1 listed, less inclusions and smaller table. #2 is sort of oval and #3 has a large table dimension (looks like the cutter was trying to stretch over the 2ct finish line).
 
RichardS_VA said:
#2 is sort of oval and #3 has a large table dimension (looks like the cutter was trying to stretch over the 2ct finish line).
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to bust your chops here but feel we need to correct information that others may misconstrue if they are a lurker or find this thread in the future.

While I do prefer a perfect 1:1 ratio, it's nearly impossible to find. We frequently see a 0.02-0.05mm variance in the L&W measurements. This stone (#2) is easily within acceptable limits and not close to an oval.

In regards to stone #3, I disagree with your assessment that a 58 table signifies a stone cut for weight retainage. Please clarify your position.

Looking at the idealscope and ASET images you can easily tell this stone was cut properly for beauty (not weight). If for weight we'd see light leakage which is not the case. A larger table does mean more white light return as opposed to more bolder rainbow flashes as the table is larger and gives less upper facet space to reflect rainbow colors, which is why I commented earlier it seemed flatter to me than stone #1. However, even with that being said this is a preference and not a reason to reject.

As a point of reference you can find stones with preferred ideal tables of 54-56 that will be cut too deep (>62.5%). You will likely see the girdle thickness is very thick as well. This is an example of a stone cut for weight.

But again the #3 stone was not cut for weight and is actually a very near ACA miss and will outperform the vast majority of GIA XXX stones.
 
The first thing I noticed about the ES stone was that white crystal under the table at around 3 o’clock. That might be noticeable IRL. However that price differential is huge. If your SO is not going to be too fussed between a 2.3/2.5ct and a regular 2ct stone (eg my wife would like a 1.5ct stone but after trying one on her fingers, she thinks that they are way too big so she’s happy with something around the 1ct mark), that $8k can be put towards other things for your wedding.

TBH, I think #1 is a nice balance. As is the stone that @rockysalamander mentioned.

If size is all that matters, then by all means #2 is the way to go.
 
bmfang said:
that $8k can be put towards other things for your wedding.
Click to expand...

Wise words here. My fiancee and I are paying for the majority of our wedding and each month that gets closer I readjust my spending habits. It doesn't take but about a few seconds to blast through $8k, depending what you are doing.
 
Sorry for the late reply. I read everyone's comments and the comment about I color really got me thinking. I decided to revamp my search (again) and look for a diamond that is G or H color. In the end, I bought this one: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3995840.htm

Although I already bought it, what do you prosumers think of the proportions and light performance? I also noticed there's a difference between the ASET images from WhiteFlash and AGS (I created a new post for this). How can that be explained? If you notice any major problems, I would probably return the ring and get a new one.
 
#1 would be my vote but you already bought something else. Your G diamond will be gorgeous! I love ACA's.
 
Nice stone if eye clean. ;))
 
The WF salesperson said: eyeclean from the top view, from as close as most people can focus.

Is that good enough for you guys?
 
benjw said:
The WF salesperson said: eyeclean from the top view, from as close as most people can focus.

Is that good enough for you guys?
Click to expand...

For me? That's 100% good enough. But not everyone feels the same. For some people, it's an issue of "mind clean", and it bothers them knowing inclusions are there. So I think the most important thing is you and your intended seeing it with your own eyes and making sure it works. But IMHO it'll be lovely!
 
I am glad you decided to look at higher colors! Since you had a price range from 2-2.3cts within I color, I felt like you would be wise to look at G-H, too. All ACA diamonds are going to be beautiful, so really, it's a matter of what size, color, and clarity will fit in the budget.
 
benjw said:
The WF salesperson said: eyeclean from the top view, from as close as most people can focus.

Is that good enough for you guys?
Click to expand...
When you get to my age "every stone looks flawless" :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top