Help! Down to two: 1.5 princess around $11k

[jchau]

My friend is getting married and needs help picking out a diamond for his future wife. Her criteria is 1.5+ carat princess cut. We have narrowed it down to two diamonds.

James Allen 1.5 Ideal F-VVS2 GIA:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1125737.asp

WhiteFlash 1.5 ACA G-VS2 AGS:
http://www.whiteflash.com/aca_princess/Whiteflash-ACA-Princess-cut-diamond-2150718.htm

Looks like the James Allen has better specs at the same price. Any reason to go for the Whiteflash one instead? Any difference between an Ideal cut vs Whiteflash''s ACA?

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 9/23/2009 5:45:18 PM
Author:jchau
My friend is getting married and needs help picking out a diamond for his future wife. Her criteria is 1.5+ carat princess cut. We have narrowed it down to two diamonds.

James Allen 1.5 Ideal F-VVS2 GIA:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1125737.asp

WhiteFlash 1.5 ACA G-VS2 AGS:

http://www.whiteflash.com/aca_princess/Whiteflash-ACA-Princess-cut-diamond-2150718.htm

Looks like the James Allen has better specs at the same price. Any reason to go for the Whiteflash one instead? Any difference between an Ideal cut vs Whiteflash's ACA?

Linky it.

ACA is a branded cut, consistently have good cut performance, while JA stone can be good, probably not as good as the ACA. Will need an ASET image to compare which you can request JA for.

EDT:
You most likely will not be able to tell the difference in color and clarity of the 2, side by side, but you will notice the cut performance.

 

[JulieN]

eh, I'm not really loving either of them.

the 1.50 JA stone is not exactly the best cut.

The ACA seems weird for an ACA.

but both of them are attractive stones. You could do far, far worse.

 

[jchau]

Date: 9/23/2009 6:40:05 PM
Author: JulieN
eh, I''m not really loving either of them.


the 1.50 JA stone is not exactly the best cut.


The ACA seems weird for an ACA.

Thanks for the feedback! Can you provide more details to why the JA stone Ideal cut is not the best and what''s weird about the ACA?

 

[jstarfireb]

The ACA looks fab to me...seems to be that they''re heading toward a different cutting style (this one) as opposed to their older ACAs, which I think had smaller facets.

I don''t like the look of the JA stone from the photo...seems like there are 2 large triangular areas of leakage under the table (left and right). I would not even ask for an ASET/IS on this stone; the ACA is my clear choice between these two.

 

[jet2ks]

The ACA looks good to me, too.

Also not loving the JA stone. It is right at the point where it may be noticeable that it is not square. I''m thinking the darker triangles jstar mentions are a result of the difference in faceting on the long sides vs. the shorter ones. It looks like a nice princess, above typical commercial quality, just not a real top cut.

 

[JulieN]

Date: 9/23/2009 8:33:40 PM
Author: jchau

Date: 9/23/2009 6:40:05 PM

Author: JulieN

eh, I''m not really loving either of them.



the 1.50 JA stone is not exactly the best cut.



The ACA seems weird for an ACA.

Thanks for the feedback! Can you provide more details to why the JA stone Ideal cut is not the best and what''s weird about the ACA?

The JA stone is a little rectangular looking, you can tell in the picture. In both of them, there is a little bit of darkness. But I assure you that they are both very attractive. You could order them both and then pick one once you see in person.

 

[Lorelei]

Both look good although I would prefer the WF diamond in this instance. For the JA diamond you could request an ASET image, that would tell us more.