HCA Tool Does Not Work For Me

[SCARLETTE]

Hi there,
It says I have reached my max of 3. If someone can help me, I'd be so grateful. Here are the numbers:
Depth 62.5 %
Table 59%
Crown Angle
35.5°
Pavilion Angle
41.2°

Many thanks in advance!!!!

 

[Dancing Fire]

This stone won't score well on the HCA.

 

[lovedogs]

4.9 is the HCA score. Definitely a "reject".

 

[SCARLETTE]

Thanks so much for the responses! Any idea why I am only allowed 3 searches? I remember when it was free to use

 

[lovedogs]

Thanks so much for the responses! Any idea why I am only allowed 3 searches? I remember when it was free to use

I feel like it's a glich of some kind. In a different thread the mods said to contact them.

 

[sledge]

@SCARLETTE, not sure why this happens but others have complained. Hot link me next time and I can pull them for you.

In regards to why this stone is doing so bad, it has borderline depth at 62.5. The crown is very steep at 35.5 and the pavilion is also very steep at 41.2. Not to mention hitting 41.2 is a trick all in itself as really bad things happen at that angle.

To find stones that score better, look for the following:

• 54-57 table
• 60-62 depth
• 34-35 crown (maybe 35.5, only if paired with 40.6 pavilion)
• 40.6-40.9 pavilion (maybe 41, only if paired with 34 crown)
• 75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF)
• Angles must be complimentary meaning you want to pair a steep crown with a shallow pavilion (35/40.6) or vice versa (34/40.9). Also something like a 34.5/40.7 or 34.5/40.8 is quite lovely.
• Stick with GIA or AGS certified stones

 

[gm89uk]

I have 999 uses logged in, only 3 uses when I log out. I don't think it's a bug, but has been quietly made into a bonus for those regular users.

 

[SCARLETTE]

@SCARLETTE, not sure why this happens but others have complained. Hot link me next time and I can pull them for you.

In regards to why this stone is doing so bad, it has borderline depth at 62.5. The crown is very steep at 35.5 and the pavilion is also very steep at 41.2. Not to mention hitting 41.2 is a trick all in itself as really bad things happen at that angle.

To find stones that score better, look for the following:

• 54-57 table
• 60-62 depth
• 34-35 crown (maybe 35.5, only if paired with 40.6 pavilion)
• 40.6-40.9 pavilion (maybe 41, only if paired with 34 crown)
• 75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF)
• Angles must be complimentary meaning you want to pair a steep crown with a shallow pavilion (35/40.6) or vice versa (34/40.9). Also something like a 34.5/40.7 or 34.5/40.8 is quite lovely.
• Stick with GIA or AGS certified stones

Thank you, Sledge, for offering to pull the numbers for me (don't want to keep being a bother, though).
As another member pointed out, maybe it is meant for those who regularly contribute to the forum; whereas I am usually a loyal lurker only

 

[D&T]

I have 999 uses logged in, only 3 uses when I log out. I don't think it's a bug, but has been quietly made into a bonus for those regular users.

I can't get anything from home computer or phone... even when I log out and log back in. I don't mind paying but if I'm helping others... it would get pricey

 

[autumngems]

I haven't been able to use it either, says I have used my 3, kind of a let down when your trying to find a diamond , isn't that what it is for?

 

[the_mother_thing]

Have those of you having issues reached out to admin? Use the ‘contact us’ link at the bottom of the page to let them know.

 

[OoohShiny]

...
The crown is very steep at 35.5
...
To find stones that score better, look for the following:

• 54-57 table
• 60-62 depth
• 34-35 crown (maybe 35.5, only if paired with 40.6 pavilion)
• 40.6-40.9 pavilion (maybe 41, only if paired with 34 crown)
• 75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF)
• Angles must be complimentary meaning you want to pair a steep crown with a shallow pavilion (35/40.6) or vice versa (34/40.9). Also something like a 34.5/40.7 or 34.5/40.8 is quite lovely.
• Stick with GIA or AGS certified stones

Just to check my understanding, I have been stating 60-62.4 depth as the PS-recommended range - am I wrong??

I'm also not sure if we should say 35.5 degree crown is *very* steep - it's still on the edge of the 'stretch' PS-recommended ranges, isn't it??

 

[lovedogs]

Just to check my understanding, I have been stating 60-62.4 depth as the PS-recommended range - am I wrong??

I'm also not sure if we should say 35.5 degree crown is *very* steep - it's still on the edge of the 'stretch' PS-recommended ranges, isn't it??

I think 62.4 and under is the PS recommended depth. So IMHO 62.5 isn't anything horrific.

 

[sledge]

Just to check my understanding, I have been stating 60-62.4 depth as the PS-recommended range - am I wrong??

Accck....I was on my mobile and didn't type correctly. Depth normally runs 60-62.4 with a preference for < 62 if possible.

Good catch buddy.

I'm also not sure if we should say 35.5 degree crown is *very* steep - it's still on the edge of the 'stretch' PS-recommended ranges, isn't it??

When I said this I was considering the pavilion & table in relation to the crown. For example, using the same 59 table, look at how much better a 35.5 crown works with a 40.6 pavilion. So in short, I think the degree of steepness isn't static, but rather based on the relation to the other proportions.

59 table, 35.5 crown & 41.2 pavilion



59 table, 35.5 crown & 40.6 pavilion

I think 62.4 and under is the PS recommended depth. So IMHO 62.5 isn't anything horrific.

Agree. I do NOT think the stone is a reject at 62.5 by any stretch of the imagination. The 35.5/41.2 angle combo is what concerns me.

I'd be more interested to see where the extra depth is hidden at (crown, girdle, pavilion). Weird stuff tends to happen at 41.2+ pavilions, so if the depth % is higher in the pavilion this would cause me to be more concerned. For instance, 41 pavilions normally have about 43.5% depth. If this pavilion depth happened to creep up to 44% then it could create some additional oddities.

https://www.prosumerdiamonds.com/pavilion-depth-table/

 

[Dancing Fire]

Just to check my understanding, I have been stating 60-62.4 depth as the PS-recommended range - am I wrong??

Yes, you are wrong, . my recommended range is 61.4 - 62% . I don't think you'll find any super ideal cuts above 62%.

 

[autumngems]

Have those of you having issues reached out to admin? Use the ‘contact us’ link at the bottom of the page to let them know.

I did, waiting on reply

 

[autumngems]

Sledge,
where do you find these charts above? New HCA program?

 

[sledge]

Sledge,
where do you find these charts above? New HCA program?

The charts above is a custom Excel sheet I created, and based on the 2009 AGS proportions charts.

I normally do not post as I don't want to compete with HCA. It's just a different way to analyze. In this case, I felt it helped point out how the same 35.5 crown can have a varying effect when just one other parameter changes (in this case, the pavilion).

 

[autumngems]

I find it very helpful, thanks for posting

 

[gm89uk]

Pricescope guidelines are good for blind safe buying. There are lots of nice diamonds outside them.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/v/20Z103497

Sure it's 63 depth and you lose spread, but for mm/$ it's excellent.

Examples of the above stone is why I keep my depth percentage higher than the PS recommended

 

[noscrusir]

I've been locked out of the HCA tool after 3 uses as well. I'm sure they're monetizing it now, which is their right since this is patented. Not so good for us as consumers who are just trying to compare choices on a small scale for ourselves or friends/family.

 

[Kaycee2018]

I've been locked out of the HCA tool after 3 uses as well. I'm sure they're monetizing it now, which is their right since this is patented. Not so good for us as consumers who are just trying to compare choices on a small scale for ourselves or friends/family.

Same.

 

[sledge]

Pricescope guidelines are good for blind safe buying. There are lots of nice diamonds outside them.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/v/20Z103497

Sure it's 63 depth and you lose spread, but for mm/$ it's excellent.

Examples of the above stone is why I keep my depth percentage higher than the PS recommended

I didn't do an in depth search, but this quickly popped up. About $1,200 more expensive but has FAINT flour instead of MEDIUM fluor. Put aside any clarity or individual preferences regarding fluor, and I think we'd both agree the stone with medium needs to be discounted more -- especially in D color. Just a matter of how much money is wrapped up in that. I'd say at least half the difference, or $600. Maybe more.

What would you prefer and why?

1.70 D SI1 @ $14,310
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R170-40Z152730?utm_source=rarecarat&utm_medium=cpc

57 table, 61.5 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.6 pavilion & 75 LGF



One major advantage I see with the stone you listed is it has a complete array of images so you can make a more intelligent decision. Being ED, there's a 50/50 shot you may be able to get images of this stone as well but it's not guaranteed. Hence part of the risk of buying virtual inventory, as images confirm and give warm fuzzies.

FYI, the HCA on the other stone you listed.

 

[gm89uk]

Hey Sledge, without images, impossible to answer accurately. My other stone looks very precision cut. That means more to me than the medium vs negligible fluorescence. In terms of value, precision cut (non superideal) do not usually demand a premium over their GIA excellent counterparts, particularly compared to fluor. A medium fluor D may or may not be an issue.

My suggestion was really for someone with a 13k budget, after maybe a 1.6. But would miss out on this 1.7 because of where they put their sliders limits and stats. This 1.7 would face up the same size as the 1.6, have a larger overall size (because depth does still add to the dimension of size, regardless of the focus on width here) and be a great performer.