Help! AGS Ideal 0 stone w/ HCA 2.7?

[icer]

First of all, thanks to everyone in this community. I've been lurking and learning for months, and it has greatly aided my diamond buying process. Of course, in the end it comes down to buying ONE, and I still have 3-4 to choose from. I hope you can help.

I am trying to maximize my value. I have $4k max to spend on a stone - am more comfortable with $3500. It will be going, most likely, in thissetting. I originally wanted a 1ct stone, but have come to the realization I think I need to go smaller to get the quality I want. No more than H color (prefer g), looking for excellent/ideal cut, and am willing to save money on cleanliness - all I want is eye clean.

I thought I found the perfect stone:
6.16x6.21x3.81
ags ideal 0 / 0 symmetry / 0 polish
h color
si2
.9 ct
58 % table
35.5 ca
40.8 pa
61.6 depth

When I plug those numbers into the HCA tool, they come back as 2.7. This seems like a red flag to me, and I am concerned.

The idealscope image is attached.

Is this a good purchase? I was finally ready to pull the trigger, and feel the rug being yanked out from under my feet.

Other option:
Option 1
Carat weight: 0.84
Cut: Excellent
Color: F
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 60.0%
Table: 59.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: Medium blue
Measurements: 6.13*6.09*3.66
Crown Angle: 34.0
Pavilion Angle: 40.6

This one comes back as HCA 1.0, all categories excellent. It's approximately $200 more than the first diamond, at $3800.

Any guidance or recommendations as to other stones? Thanks!

 

[JulieN]

The F SI1 looks very nice. The Ideal Scope looks very nice, too, is it eye-clean?

 

[Laila619]

The idealscope actually looks fine, so no worries. I think it just got dinged for the larger table of 58%.

There does seem to be a lot of inclusions though.

ETA: Wait, that idealscope image is for the H SI2, right? Not the F SI1? I prefer the cut of the H SI2 more than the F, because I don't like a 59% table, and it has a shallower crown with a shallow pavilion (could be obstruction issues).

 

[icer]

Sorry, I wasn't clear - the idealscope is for the h/si2. It is 'marginally' eye clean, if that's possible...

I haven't pulled the idealscope for the f/si1 yet, but I think I'm going to. I'll post it up here when I get it.

Thanks for the thoughts!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Marginally eye clean would be totally and completely unacceptable to me. That IS image is just loaded with inclusions. I wouldn't consider it because of the clarity, not because of the HCA score. In fact, you don't use the HCA with AGS0 stones anyway.

The F SI1 might be okay, but we'd need to see the IS. I don't think you could tell the difference between 58 and 59 tables.

 

[Christina...]

I think that you can find a cleaner SI2. I have an SI2 and it's eye clean both from the top and from the side, but I also searched through a ton of stones to find it and asked that it be evaluated critically based on my definition of eye clean. If you need an SI2 stone to make the budget work, then I would look for stones that had twinning wisps that didn't interfere with brilliance, or inclusions that were well hidden in the faceting of the stone. I'd also consider going down in color and up in clarity a bit. Once the diamond is set you aren't going to see a difference between F and G and an H colored stone is still going to appear white.

these might work, and they all should be evaluated for eye cleanliness.
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1484785.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1512883.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1507994.asp

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1454991.asp

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

the cut is OK on that H SI2 stone because the symmetry is greaat. So dont worry about the 2.7 HCA.
But as C says - there is a lot going on and that may also affect the light performance.
The 0.84ct is almost identical diameter. Maybe?