Mara
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2002
- Messages
- 31,003
I wouldn't worry too much about the Good symmetry rating, with your naked eye you can probably only see Good/VG anyway...Excellent is more of a nice to have on paper. My stone is a Good and it is awesome!
Culet does not mean anything, as it is very small. I would worry if it was over 1.5% but maybe not even then. Under 1% is average and may be noted as 'none' or 'very small' on a report. The HCA does not penalize for anything under 1% I think..maybe 1.5%.
Also do not worry about the fact that the crown and pavilions have 'ranges' of numbers..that is normal, the number given in the end (e.g. pav angle of 40.
is the average and is the best way to represent all the numbers to you.
2.6 on the HCA is better than the original stone which had 3.9! Would ask you this. When you got the original stone, before you had it appraised, what were your initial thoughts? Did you think, wow this thing sparkles immensely but looks a little yellow? Or were you thinking, hmm this looks a little dull and looks yellow too? If you were thinking the stone looked pretty hot before you got it appraised, and it was a 3.9 with not-necessarily-ideal characteristics, then this 2.6 stone will probably look just as good if not better to you! My stone scores a 2.3 on the HCA and its a show-stopper, I have gotten so many compliments. Again, the HCA is a preference tool, it's really about how much weight people prefer to give it. HCA also assumes that the stones are very symmetrical with very good polish. That isn't always the case so your stone may cause the score to veer a little to the lower or higher depending on its variables. I like using the HCA to weed out the obvious baddies (e.g. 4+), but as I have learned from viewing my stone in person, even a stone in the 2 range can still be stunning. (2.6 is still 'very good!')
The price is inline with what your other stone was and this one is a VS2, a definite upgrade in clarity and normally in price as well. All in all I think this sounds very promising--esp that they are willing to give you this better sounding stone for the same $$ due to the original mishap. I would suggest having UD send the diamond to RockDoc or Dave or one of the other appraisers on here who will run tests on it and determine whether or not it's the stone it says it is. UD *should* agree to do this BEFORE you pay the money for the stone, esp in light of the other stone not being what it was touted to be. I would have them send the stone to an appraiser, have it tested, if the appraiser says 'go' then you can pay for the stone and the appraiser can send it directly to you with your reporting. The appraisal fees will cost a bit (maybe $300?) but in light of your first experience I would highly recommend the few extra bucks to be sure you aren't wasting your time again with this stone.
Whew...okay I will stop now. Hope this is what you were looking for!
GOOD LUCK!!
Culet does not mean anything, as it is very small. I would worry if it was over 1.5% but maybe not even then. Under 1% is average and may be noted as 'none' or 'very small' on a report. The HCA does not penalize for anything under 1% I think..maybe 1.5%.
Also do not worry about the fact that the crown and pavilions have 'ranges' of numbers..that is normal, the number given in the end (e.g. pav angle of 40.
2.6 on the HCA is better than the original stone which had 3.9! Would ask you this. When you got the original stone, before you had it appraised, what were your initial thoughts? Did you think, wow this thing sparkles immensely but looks a little yellow? Or were you thinking, hmm this looks a little dull and looks yellow too? If you were thinking the stone looked pretty hot before you got it appraised, and it was a 3.9 with not-necessarily-ideal characteristics, then this 2.6 stone will probably look just as good if not better to you! My stone scores a 2.3 on the HCA and its a show-stopper, I have gotten so many compliments. Again, the HCA is a preference tool, it's really about how much weight people prefer to give it. HCA also assumes that the stones are very symmetrical with very good polish. That isn't always the case so your stone may cause the score to veer a little to the lower or higher depending on its variables. I like using the HCA to weed out the obvious baddies (e.g. 4+), but as I have learned from viewing my stone in person, even a stone in the 2 range can still be stunning. (2.6 is still 'very good!')
The price is inline with what your other stone was and this one is a VS2, a definite upgrade in clarity and normally in price as well. All in all I think this sounds very promising--esp that they are willing to give you this better sounding stone for the same $$ due to the original mishap. I would suggest having UD send the diamond to RockDoc or Dave or one of the other appraisers on here who will run tests on it and determine whether or not it's the stone it says it is. UD *should* agree to do this BEFORE you pay the money for the stone, esp in light of the other stone not being what it was touted to be. I would have them send the stone to an appraiser, have it tested, if the appraiser says 'go' then you can pay for the stone and the appraiser can send it directly to you with your reporting. The appraisal fees will cost a bit (maybe $300?) but in light of your first experience I would highly recommend the few extra bucks to be sure you aren't wasting your time again with this stone.
Whew...okay I will stop now. Hope this is what you were looking for!
300x240.png)