Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help needed between two Tiffany & Co. rings

ClassicSAC

ClassicSAC

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
218
I am purchasing a preowned Tiffany & Co. brilliant cut classic solitaire direct from a vendor suggested by a fellow PS member. I did all the homework to check out his reputation and his eBay feedback. I am not buying from eBay but directly from his online jewelry website. I have negotiated prices on both stones and compared the table, depth,crown and pavilion percentages of both stones. Any feedback would be appreciated on which stone would be worth the money. Note: this is a secondary ring to wear when I don’t want to wear my 1.4 ct. solitaire with my .98 carat diamond five stone band.

Ring #1: .87 ct, I, VS1, triple excellent, no fluorescence, ALL Tiffany paperwork and suede box but no blue outer box, $5,000

Ring #2: .91 ct, I, VVS2, triple excellent, no fluorescence, no original paperwork, suede box, GIA certificate, faces up very large like a 1.0 ct, $5,500

Both rings are returnable.

The second one has perfect percentages based on what I read on PS.

Thanks in advance for any help!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV_
We'd need more specs. Can you list the information from the paperwork for each diamond?
 
msop04 said:
We'd need more specs. Can you list the information from the paperwork for each diamond?
Click to expand...

Here are photos of the paperwork and I also went on GIA.edu to verify the GIA certificate for the larger stone.
690428DF-ACE8-4B6F-8EAE-72F41AC08BF7.pngAE70452B-1DCA-4E37-8312-9ED86DEE3D5D.png9336924A-E19C-46A1-BF54-1E128D6D80BD.png
 
Those are really blurry.. can you post the table, depth, crown angle, and pavilion angle for each?

ETA: gotta run... hopefully someone will look at these soon!
 
msop04 said:
Those are really blurry.. can you post the table, depth, crown angle, and pavilion angle for each?

ETA: gotta run... hopefully someone will look at these soon!
Click to expand...

Here is the information.

.87
table 59
depth 62.4
crown angle 35.1
pavilion angle 41.0

.91
table 56
depth 61.2
crown angle 34.5
pavilion angle 40.6
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV_
They look like beautiful diamonds to me.

However, I don't understand the logic of having a second ring that is so similar in style and size to your primary ring. For example, if your current 1.4 ct solitaire ring is impractical for you (perhaps you use your hands a lot at work, or need to wear gloves, etc.) then I don't think going down to a .9-ish ct is going to make much, if any, difference. Now if your current solitaire sits very high in its setting and this Tiffany one sits much lower, then perhaps you will feel a difference and the new one will be more practical.

If you are worried about safety issues wearing a 1.4 ct, again I think going down to a .9 is misguided because I don't think someone mugging you is going to change their mind over a half carat. I think most casual observers of your ring won't notice a difference at all in that small of a change of size. So if safety is your concern, perhaps going down smaller so there will be more of a visible difference?
 
RunningwithScissors said:
They look like beautiful diamonds to me.

However, I don't understand the logic of having a second ring that is so similar in style and size to your primary ring. For example, if your current 1.4 ct solitaire ring is impractical for you (perhaps you use your hands a lot at work, or need to wear gloves, etc.) then I don't think going down to a .9-ish ct is going to make much, if any, difference. Now if your current solitaire sits very high in its setting and this Tiffany one sits much lower, then perhaps you will feel a difference and the new one will be more practical.

If you are worried about safety issues wearing a 1.4 ct, again I think going down to a .9 is misguided because I don't think someone mugging you is going to change their mind over a half carat. I think most casual observers of your ring won't notice a difference at all in that small of a change of size. So if safety is your concern, perhaps going down smaller so there will be more of a visible difference?
Click to expand...

My current setting sits very, very high and is in a four prong setting. I really want a six prong, low setting with a thicker shank. I also just purchased a channel set eternity band from Tiffany’s which I will wear with one of these rings so it will be a different look all together.
 
I was going to say that you should ask the experts here on which ring is better and I'm glad to see you did.
 
Details on the two stones

.87
table 59
depth 62.4
crown angle 35.1
pavilion angle 41.0

.91
table 56
depth 61.2
crown angle 34.5
pavilion angle 40.6
 
Wewechew said:
If that setting could be sized up to a 7.5 it would have been mine a long time ago :Up_to_something:
Click to expand...

I saw that setting. It is also for sale on eBay. My stone is a 1.4 which is slightly larger than the stone that was in it, 1.30. Do you think it would work?
 
ClassicSAC said:
I saw that setting. It is also for sale on eBay. My stone is a 1.4 which is slightly larger than the stone that was in it, 1.30. Do you think it would work?
Click to expand...

What is your stone's mm diameter?
 
SimoneDi said:
Why don’t you just reset your current diamond in a new 6-prong, lower set, Tiffany-like setting?

Something preloved: https://loupetroop.com/listings/set...6-prong-solitaire-setting-retail-1800-dollars
Click to expand...

That's the setting I had made for my new CBI last summer. HPD made it for me. I love the simple elegance of it. I changed a few small details to make the setting more comfortable such as softening the knife edge where it went around past my fingers (I find Tiffany's knife edge to be a little uncomfortable.)
 
RunningwithScissors said:
That's the setting I had made for my new CBI last summer. HPD made it for me. I love the simple elegance of it. I changed a few small details to make the setting more comfortable such as softening the knife edge where it went around past my fingers (I find Tiffany's knife edge to be a little uncomfortable.)
Click to expand...

Could you please post a photo of your ring?
 
ClassicSAC said:
Could you please post a photo of your ring?
Click to expand...

Here's the thread where I introduced her...(beginning of thread there pics from the top but later on there are many from the side.)

Hope this helps!

www.pricescope.com

Introducing

It has taken me awhile to post images, I've had health set backs and have been busy catching up from being overseas this summer. May I present ...(drum roll)..."Dainty," my CBI 2.558 D VS1 in a simple, platinum solitaire setting. Dainty has soul! She has so much fire and throws big chunky...
www.pricescope.com
 
RunningwithScissors said:
Here's the thread where I introduced her...(beginning of thread there pics from the top but later on there are many from the side.)

Hope this helps!

www.pricescope.com

Introducing

It has taken me awhile to post images, I've had health set backs and have been busy catching up from being overseas this summer. May I present ...(drum roll)..."Dainty," my CBI 2.558 D VS1 in a simple, platinum solitaire setting. Dainty has soul! She has so much fire and throws big chunky...
www.pricescope.com
Click to expand...

Stunning!!! Congratulations on your new ring!
 
@ClassicSAC -

I agree with others here, that the Vatche setting makes sense as the way to go. Going from a 1.3 to a 1.4ct stone in that setting should be easily doable by any competent jeweler.

However - to answer your original question - the first diamond is overly deep and too flat on top for my liking.

The *second* diamond, however, has perfect stats and should be a gorgeous, gorgeous ring.

Do let us know which direction you go - you've got some great choices going on!

:wavey:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top