HCA question

[sparkling]

If I''m trying to get the most bang for my buck, do I want as low as possible on HCA. For example, there''s this


1.124 H SI1 0 0.6-EX
ex-ex-ex-ex 60 57 34° 40.6° AGS 0.9-2.1 pt id id no $5759 DCD

1.12 H SI1 0 (H&A)
A Cut Above 0.9-EX
ex-ex-ex-vg 60.6 55 34.7° 40.7° AGS thn-med f pt id id neg $6370

The first one has ex,ex,ex,ex and a HCA rating of .6 while the second one has a rating of .9. Am I correct that at least according to the numbers the first one should be better since the number is lower?

I will be looking at some GIA ideal cut stones this weekend. Should I take the HCA with me? I guess its moot since I won''t have the info on the cert? I''m just about to hang up the local scene and buy over the internet. Seems like it will be alot less schlepping and alot more knowns.

Remarks?

 

[Lord Summerisle]

umm. short answer - under 2 - No. lower number does mean better - just hair splitting. The little explination if you read the results page is that under 2 you have eliminated the poor performers. But beyond that one that scores 1-2 may look better to you than one that scores between 0.2-1

the reason for the different scores in the last column for spread - is the Excllent rating comes in at a depth of 60.3% i think it is. But still 60.6% aint bad by any means...

The main difference your going to notice between the 2 is the difference in the size of the table - as as much as i believe a smaller table has the effect of producing more fire...

wouldnt discout either... but i think the DCD one looks that little more attractive simply down to its price. - they are virtually identical in width to.. the DCD one being 6.72-6.80 and the WF being 6.75-6.79


so to answer yoiur question.. i dont know.

 

[Regular Guy]

Sparkling,

Although it seems clear to me that one more excellent in an area is better than one less, and the way you get the number you''re looking for from 0 - 2 is based on those composite pieces of brilliance, fire, scintillation & spread, such that lower numbers tend to yield more excellents, genenally -- while some say a #1 is the target to go for (rather than the lowest), the best intelligence you''ll get a quote on from those who seem to know here is that anything from 0 - 2 and you''re good to go.

Keep shopping, as you like, of course, but on the off chance you''d want to send both of those stones to say, Rich Sherwood, and get his say...I''m in for $10 if you''ll send me a copy of his report. I''d love to see how he''d compare them.

Based on relatively limited exposure here, I''m guessing your results would be similar for both, and that both would be really good options. But...you''ll probably end up picking up only one, so you be the judge.

Ira Z.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You have been well advised by the other 2.
HCA is for rejecting bad stones - not for selecting between stones that have good ratings.
Ideal-scope images and other things are better for that.