Help with tiffany diamond

[awenuts]

Hello,

I am new here and have been sifting through the vast amounts of information on this site. I am looking at a Tiffany engagment ring for my girlfriend. The one I have been looking at is the following:

.94 carat, Round Brilliant, VVS2, F - color

Depth: 60.8%
Table: 59%
Crown angle: 34.7 deg
Pavilion %: 43.7
Culet: none
Girdle: Thin to medium

Price: ~11,500.00

When I typed it into the HCA, needless to say I was dissapointed when it rated a 3.4 and only "Good" on fire and scintilation. So I am guessing that this wouldn't be a good ring to buy? I am not a rich man so i would like to get the best cut possible for the amount that I am spending. Any suggestions? Oh, and although I am sure I could find a high quality stone for cheaper at other places I plan on sticking with Tiffany's.

 

[Ty Cobb]

well, glad to hear you want to stick with Tiffs, I am going to warn you, that you will have several people point out other alternatives, but if Tiffs is what you want, stick with it. Now about your diamond: I am going to guess that the table size is what is throwing it off of HCA.

This could be reason for concern, it could not. If you look at several threads that discuss Tiffs cutting practices on here, a trend emerges. Tiffs tends to cut more for fire then for scintilation.

Have you actually seen the ring in person?

When you do, ask if you can take it over to one of there windows(a north facing one preferably) and take a look at it in sunlight. Like any jewelry store, they are going to have perfect lighting in Tiffs, so look at it in window lighting.

If you are worried about it, you can have them go through their inventory to look at the various measurements. When I was looking I had them print off the specs on 8 different diamonds for me to decide which ones I wanted brought in.

HCA is a tool, not a perfect one(but a very good one), for comparing diamonds unseen. The final judgement though should be with your own eyes.

 

[mrssalvo]

when I was hunting for a round, i used a post from mara that had her favorite ideal specs in it. i did go and view stones in person with different combo''s to see which my eyes prefered. you can go into tiffany''s and have them find stones that fall within these ranges, they have them. i agree with ty cobb that the table is on the large side and probably throwing off the HCA.

Here''s what mara said:

table: 55-56 (but i would do 54 or 57 MAYBE if the other numbers corresponded but i''d prefer not to)
depth: 60.4ish-61.2ish (these are really strict, you can go up to 62 and still have a lovely diamond but then you lose some diameter in the depth which bugs me)
crown angle: 34.4ish-34.9 (maybe more shallow than 34.4 but depends on other specs)
pav angle: 40.5-40.8 (40.9 if necessary and other specs are cherry)
girdle: thin-med is my fave because i don''t want weight lost in the girdle nor do i like to see it
polish/symm: EX/EX or ID/ID
culet: none or vs is fine too

 

[awenuts]

Yes, I did see it in person. I compared it with about 6 other stones that were in the range that I wanted. I narrowed it down to three rings, at which point he let me look at the three I liked the best under the microscope (30x I believe). The one I chose as the final contender was amazing even under the the microscope. My salesman made it a point to have me look at the ring under normal lighting conditions and it sparkled the same. I guess I was so impressed with this stone in person that I expected to blow the HCA off the charts.

 

[shel]

In addition to the table, the pavilion percentage isn''t favored by the HCA either. It prefers to keep this under ~43.2%. Seems like the HCA is a little too exclusionary sometimes.

 

[zenit77]

awenuts - if your budget is ~$12k, why not get a bigger and better stone somewhere else?

I am also looking for a round stone under $13k, but all the stones that I have ligned up so far are 1.5ct E-F VS2-SI1 GIA AGS Ideal-EX cuts.

Tiffany was the first vendor I looked at in NYC, but never went back to them after I realized how much "The Name" costs there.

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 9/18/2007 3:08:00 PM
Author: mrssalvo
when I was hunting for a round, i used a post from mara that had her favorite ideal specs in it. i did go and view stones in person with different combo''s to see which my eyes prefered. you can go into tiffany''s and have them find stones that fall within these ranges, they have them. i agree with ty cobb that the table is on the large side and probably throwing off the HCA.

Here''s what mara said:

table: 55-56 (but i would do 54 or 57 MAYBE if the other numbers corresponded but i''d prefer not to)
depth: 60.4ish-61.2ish (these are really strict, you can go up to 62 and still have a lovely diamond but then you lose some diameter in the depth which bugs me)
crown angle: 34.4ish-34.9 (maybe more shallow than 34.4 but depends on other specs)
pav angle: 40.5-40.8 (40.9 if necessary and other specs are cherry)
girdle: thin-med is my fave because i don''t want weight lost in the girdle nor do i like to see it
polish/symm: EX/EX or ID/ID
culet: none or vs is fine too

How funny. Those are the same specs I used to find a friend her diamond. LOL.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/18/2007 3:26:58 PM
Author: awenuts
Yes, I did see it in person. I compared it with about 6 other stones that were in the range that I wanted. I narrowed it down to three rings, at which point he let me look at the three I liked the best under the microscope (30x I believe). The one I chose as the final contender was amazing even under the the microscope. My salesman made it a point to have me look at the ring under normal lighting conditions and it sparkled the same. I guess I was so impressed with this stone in person that I expected to blow the HCA off the charts.

If you got it away from the fancy lighting, and it still sparkled beautifully, you're done. You don't need the HCA. You have seen the diamond, and that lil gizmo that you plug a few numbers into, hasn't.

Enjoy your stone.

And post pics!

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 9/18/2007 3:08:00 PM
Author: mrssalvo
Here''s what mara said:


table: 55-56 (but i would do 54 or 57 MAYBE if the other numbers corresponded but i''d prefer not to)

depth: 60.4ish-61.2ish (these are really strict, you can go up to 62 and still have a lovely diamond but then you lose some diameter in the depth which bugs me)

crown angle: 34.4ish-34.9 (maybe more shallow than 34.4 but depends on other specs)

pav angle: 40.5-40.8 (40.9 if necessary and other specs are cherry)

girdle: thin-med is my fave because i don''t want weight lost in the girdle nor do i like to see it

polish/symm: EX/EX or ID/ID

culet: none or vs is fine too

I know that these are Mara''s personal fave specs - but they ARE incredably strict, and to strick ridgilyto them is to restrict yourself needlessly

55-58/59poss table gives a little more room
59.9-62depth - diameter differances between the extremes of this depth range is going to be 1/10th to 1/100th mm - ie non visable
a pav angle between 40.5 and 40.9 but you a nice range either side of the tolkowsky ideal of 40.75 (no cert is going to be as accurate to that 0.05° as it is an average angle of the 8 pavilion mains)
a crown amgle that compliments the pav angle...and IMHO the diamond when viewed is a sarkler in many differant lighting conditions

there are many good combinations of crown and pavilion that work well...

 

[mrssalvo]

thank you Lord Sumerise, you are absolutely correct.....of course, since he is buying from Tiffany's might as well aim for the cream of the crop right?


I actually agree with ellen, that awenuts, you have seen the diamond, the HCA should be used when buying unseen, but for me, eyes trump any tool. keep in mind that Old European Cut stones fail miserably on the HCA and yet they are some of the most beautifully cut stones to me. Tiffany does not sell dog stones so if that's the one you saw and loved, that's all that really matters

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 9/18/2007 5:52:14 PM
Author: mrssalvo
thank you Lord Sumerise, you are absolutely correct.....of course, since he is buying from Tiffany's might as well aim for the cream of the crop right?

right,

all i was trying to say is theres more cream out there than that narrow trim from one edge of the crop.

maybe watch this pricescope video where Leon and Jim Allen take 3 stones out into Central Park to ask folks preferances.
with a (#1) D61.5 T56 C34.5 P40.5, a (#2) D62.8 T57 C35 P41.4 and a (#3) D60.4 T57 C34 P40.7/40.8 - and its not as clear cut as those numbers would have you think - both Leon and Jim have trouble picking out the P41.4, and at the end 2 folks liked #1, 3 liked #2 and 2 liked #3, with 2 folks saying they couldnt see a differance.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/19/2007 4:02:15 AM
Author: Lord Summerisle

Date: 9/18/2007 5:52:14 PM
Author: mrssalvo
thank you Lord Sumerise, you are absolutely correct.....of course, since he is buying from Tiffany''s might as well aim for the cream of the crop right?

right,

all i was trying to say is theres more cream out there than that narrow trim from one edge of the crop.

lol I definitely agree.

 

[bee*]

Date: 9/18/2007 3:44:46 PM
Author: zenit77
awenuts - if your budget is ~$12k, why not get a bigger and better stone somewhere else?

Just one thing to mention-not everyone wants a large stone.

I picked mine by sight when I went into the store. I haven''t plugged my numbers into anything (although it''s a lucida so Im not sure if there is anything I can check it with). I know I love it and from the times I have seen it, it sparkles like mad. If you think the numbers thing is going to bother you, then give tiffanys the specs that you want and they will find one for you that fits that. If the numbers don''t bother you and as you said it impressed you a lot, then keep it. Best of luck and be sure to take photos!