HCA Scores! Need to Know!

[rob0311]

Assuming all things beeing equal( polish, sym, color etc.) should I purchase a stone with an HCA scoreof 0.5 over one with a 1.5? It is hard to judge overthe internet and I would like to get your opinion. I understand that the HCA is only a filtering tool and personal preference comes into play at some point, but alas there are still some limitations dealing on the internet. The AGSL and GCAL look great on both and price is the same so....? It seems to remember reading that some people prefer diamonds in the 1 to 2 range better than lets say 0 to 1. Does it have to do where it places in the excellent range BIC vs TIC vs FIC?

Thanks!

 

[avlis]

again, as you already know, the HCA is not a selection tool. i wish the HCA only gave results in a good/bad format. both your stones are good. you need to look at the differences to decide which is best for you.

 

[Ellen]

Can you post all the specs for them? Then we could throw our pennies worth in.

 

[angeline]

All things can't be equal if the scores are different. Maybe post the specs and see if some other selection criteria comes to light?

Just an idea,

a

edited to add: great minds and all that Ellen!

 

[Lorelei]

http://diamonds.pricescope.com/ideal.asp

See this thread above for more info. The lower the score doesn''t necessarily mean that diamond is better than another, diamonds which score under 2 are then worth further consideration. You then use Idealscope images and ultimately your own eyes to choose. Rarely a score under 1 may mean a diamond might lack a little contrast, but again an IS image is helpful there. The HCA can predict how a certain known set of proportions can work together, but it can''t actually see the diamond.

 

[rob0311]

Thanks for the help stats are as follows;

1) 2.12 cts, F color, vs2, Polish ID, Sym ID, 57% Table, 61.4% Depth, 34.3 Crown angle, 40.9 Pav angle, Cutlet none, Thin to med girdle, Fluro none

2) 2.21 cts, F color, vs2, Polish IDeal, Sym ID, 57 %Table, 61% Depth, 35.2 crown angle, 40.5 Pav angle, cutlet none, thin to med girdle, flluro none.

These are the numbers from the GCAL are they better than the ones from the AGSL certificate?

 

[Ellen]

Thanks for getting us the specs rob.

If I were picking from those, I''d go with #1. I like all its numbers very much. Can''t find a thing wrong with it.

On #2, I am not loving that C&P combo. That''s not to say it wouldn''t work, but it''s on the edge, to me. Without an IS pic, #1 is by far the safer bet.


From what I''ve read, GCAL is a smaller, very reputable lab. Whether their numbers mean more/are more accurate than AGS''s, couldn''t say. I would merely be guessing.

HTH

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/1/2007 3:02:14 PM
Author: rob0311
Thanks for the help stats are as follows;

1) 2.12 cts, F color, vs2, Polish ID, Sym ID, 57% Table, 61.4% Depth, 34.3 Crown angle, 40.9 Pav angle, Cutlet none, Thin to med girdle, Fluro none

2) 2.21 cts, F color, vs2, Polish IDeal, Sym ID, 57 %Table, 61% Depth, 35.2 crown angle, 40.5 Pav angle, cutlet none, thin to med girdle, flluro none.

These are the numbers from the GCAL are they better than the ones from the AGSL certificate?

F, VS2 2 carats - Yay! Very nice ... Someone is going to be VERY happy.

I ran your numbers through the Holloway Cut Advisor and they came back with the following results:

#1 - Light return & fire = Excellent, Scintillation & Spread (diameter for weight) = Very Good
Total Visual Performance = 1.5, Excellent

#2 - Light return, Fire & Scintillation = Excellent & Spread = Very good
Total Visual Performance = 0.6, Excellent

Based on these results, they both look like a safe bet ... Excellent choices! If your girl is concerned with carat size, maybe # 2 might be the better choice. If not, they both seem about the same to me.

I don''t think that GCAL would be considered "better" than AGS yet, however, what I have heard about them is that they are reputable and, given more exposure and time = reputation, they may be considered on par with GIA & AGS. I''m not an expert ... Just things that I have heard ... Also, I checked out their website and they provide a wealth of info on their certs, which is also really good!

Good luck with your choice! I''m sure your lady will be happy either way. Congrats

 

[rob0311]

Thank you to everyone for the advice! It''s kind of scary, such a large purchase over the Internet. I''m getting the stone from Blue Nile Signature Collection so I''ll let you all know how it goes!

Rob

PS I did go to Good old Gold since I live on Long Island. Even though they were very knowledgeable and helpful no one ever even called to follow up since I wanted a larger diamond than they had in stock that day! Not very good business sense!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/1/2007 4:57:23 PM
Author: Ellen
Thanks for getting us the specs rob.

If I were picking from those, I''d go with #1. I like all its numbers very much. Can''t find a thing wrong with it.

On #2, I am not loving that C&P combo. That''s not to say it wouldn''t work, but it''s on the edge, to me. Without an IS pic, #1 is by far the safer bet.


From what I''ve read, GCAL is a smaller, very reputable lab. Whether their numbers mean more/are more accurate than AGS''s, couldn''t say. I would merely be guessing.

HTH

Agree with Ellen.