Help with better value and stone quality

[gooner2389]

Hi all - shopping around for a ring and have visited two stores where friends have shopped before so figured these would be a good start. I have been shown two rings thus far and would love to get an opinion on whether 1) prices are reasonable and 2) the stone quality of each. Each stone is 'eye clean'. I also wanted to get an opinion on platinum vs. white gold for a band - pros/cons? Lastly, do dates of GIA reports matter? The first stone is from 2007 - should I be worried? The second report is from 2014.

Here are the stats for each:

1.20 ct G SI1
GIA Cut grade - very good
Measurements - 6.92 - 6.95 x 4.13 mm
Depth - 59.6%
Table - 58%
Crown Angle - 33 degrees
Crown Height - 13.5%
Pavilion angle - 40.8 degrees
Pavilion depth - 43%
Star length - 50%
Lower Half - 80%
Girdle - thin to medium, faceted, 3%
Culet - none
Polish - very good
Symmetry - Excellent
Floures - none
PRICE INCLUDING PLATINUM SOLITAIRE 4 PRONG - $9,850

1.21 ct E SI1
GIA Cut Grade - very good
Measurements - 6.73 - 6.77 x 4.28 mm
Depth - 63.5%
Table - 58%
Crown Angle - 36 degrees
Crown Height - 15.5%
Pavilion Angle - 41.4 degrees
Pavilion depth - 44%
Star Length - 55%
Lower Half - 80%
Girdle - medium to slightly thick, faceted, 4%
Culet - none
Polish - excellent
Symmetry - excellent
Floures - none
PRICE INCLUDING WHITE GOLD SOLITAIRE 6 PRING - $8,000

Thanks for any help anyone can offer!

 

[solgen]

2nd stone is deep and hiding weight. Not very complimentary proportions either.

I'd opt for the first one because its proportions are much better. As for the 2007 grading it can be some cause for concern as you need to make sure there's no damage to the stone. Is it new or used? If new you have to wonder why it sat so long and perhaps it isn't eye clean.

Platinum vs white gold. I'd opt for platinum as it can be polished whereas WG usually needs to be dipped to maintain its white appearance.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'd pass on both stones. The first one is a flat top no crown height stone. The second one is way too deep.

 

[ecf8503]

Try this: https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca

Plug all the numbers in. You want a number under 2 ideally (lower is not better once you're under 2). Get an idealscope image if possible to assess light performance. You want the best cut quality you can get - that's what makes the diamond sparkle!

Both the stones you listed are about the same carat weight, but see how much they vary in diameter? One is a little bigger than it should be, one is smaller. If you are paying for this carat weight range you want it to face up big and white - which is influenced by cut quality.

The first stone is close to a "60/60" cut - https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond. It scores a 0.7 on the HCA, which is good, but will have more white light return and less colored light return (fire) than an ideally proportioned stone of the same weight, which some people prefer, just be aware. Can you get an idealscope image on this one?

The second stone scores a horrid 5.4 on the HCA (good only if price is your main concern). It is steep and deep and faces up much smaller than it should. Pass.

 

[gooner2389]

Not sure if the first stone is new or used. I am going back to the jeweler sometime this week and will have him clarify. Second stone did seem too deep so I was immediately worried about it. I am going to find out about the idealscope image.

In any case, is the price on the first stone reasonable given those characteristics?

 

[D_]

You may want to use the diamond search function at the top of the page to look at comparisons.
It is a good way to gauge market value (bearing in mind, if you are shopping at B&M stores then it's normal for their prices to be ~20% higher).

 

[Rockinruby]

I would definitely ask if the first stone has been set before or if it hasn't then is there something about it that caused it to sit so long. I think it's pretty common for some reports to be older, but I would see what they have to say. I would avoid the second stone.

 

[JDDN]

If you're not opposed to buying online you will get a better stone or the same quality stone for less money (including the setting he's factoring in). A recent stone on James Allen is $8400 for 1.2 carats, E, SI1, GIA triple excellent.

If you can, stick with an excellent cut GIA or an ideal cut AGS. I worry about "very good" cut diamonds and their performance. It may look nice, but if you were to compare it side by side to one with a better cut, you'd likely see the difference.

And just an FYI, look at the dimensions when comparing stones of similar carat weight. The 1st stone measures 6.92 x 6.95 for 1.2 carats. The 2nd stone measures 6.73 x 6.77 for 1.21 carats. The 1.21 carat stone faces up smaller (and the difference is enough to appreciate for most) because it's cut deep, meaning the weight is in the depth not the spread.

If these were my only 2 options, I'd choose #1.

Good luck to you!

 

[gooner2389]

Thanks for the help!