How does this diamond sound?

[MrsAbel]

After reading all of the glowing reports about Engagement Rings Direct I decided to go take a look. Mark found 3 stones for me that fit all of my specifications and my budget. I''ve narrowed it down to two and I wanted to know what people thought without actually seeing the stones themselves.

Stone #1 (My personal favorite)

Shape and Cutting Style: Emerald Cut
Measurements: 7.49 x 5.36 x 3.65
Weight: 1.31 ct.

Depth: 68.1%
Table: 60%
Girdle: Medium
Culet: Very small

Finish: Good
Polish: Good

Clarity: VS1
Color: F
Flourescence: None

Report Date: October, 2002



Stone #2

Shape and Cutting Style: Emerald Cut
Measurements: 7.49 x 5.50 x 3.52
Weight: 1.31 ct.

Depth: 64.0%
Table: 72%
Girdle: Thin - Slightly Thick
Culet: None
Finish: Very Good
Polish: Good
Clarity: VS1
Color: G
Flourescence: None

Report Date: August, 2006


I am a little concerned that stone #1''s report is from October, 2002. Is this a red flag? Should I inquire about why the report is so old???

What do you all think about these two stones???? The differences in price is not significant enough to push me one way or the other. I want to make sure that I get the best stone possible.

Thanks!!!!

 

[belle]

step cuts are something that really need to be seen in person to be appreciated. it would be unfair for us to judge these beauties by some numbers. you are in a far better position than we are to make a selection. trust yourself!

don't worry about an older report, sometimes it just takes a little longer for the right diamond to be matched up with the right person!

 

[Gypsy]

Well... first of all. I would ask Mark which is brighter and better looking to the eye. He has a great eye. That would influence me more than anything short of my own eyes picking. Second-- you have listed two catagories for "polish" and then "finish"??? Aren''t one of those supposed to be symmetry? And if so then #2 has better symmetry and is slightly wider so I would go for it IF and only IF Mark said it was the better stone of the two. Unless I was looking at them myself, I wouldn''t argue with Mark''s eye though.

 

[MrsAbel]

He said that the better stone was the first (the one that I also liked the most). So, I think he''s right on the money.

Also, more importantly, the certificate is from 2002. Is that a problem???? Should I be concerned???

Thank you for your opinions!

 

[february2003bride]

I wouldn''t worry about the fact that it''s from 2002 however, you can have it resubmitted to GIA for a new report, if it really bothers you.