How reliable is the HCA, is it reliable enough...

[Chase035]

to assume that I''m getting a very good deal. Here are the specifics.

Other .23 ct., D color, VS1 clarity, no cutlet, m-stk girdle, medium blue fluorescence stones have only a very good GIA rated cut, good polish and good symmetry and are priced around $450-470.

The Blue Nile stone I''m considering is .23 ct., D color, VS1 clarity, no cutlet, m-stk girdle, mb fluorescence but has an excellent GIA rated cut, very good polish and symmetry and is priced at $362. The HCA says its a 1.4 TIC based on the 59 Table, 60.2 Depth, 34 crown angle and 40.8 Pavillion angle. I''m hoping the discount isn''t too good to be true but the only other reason I can see for this stone to be so highly discounted is the cut. Short of a sarin report, would you feel comfortable enough with the HCA results to feel as though this is simply a good deal?


Here''s a link to the stone.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD01174385&track=rvDia_3&elem=dia_view

 

[Chase035]

Probably a question best left for the experts. But I haven''t gotten any solid feedback and I''m still skeptical about why this diamond is selling for almost $100 less than comparable diamonds on the price comparison tool despite having a better GIA cut grade (excellent) and HCA scores.

 

[JohnQuixote]

It may simply be a good deal. The mb fluor means a discount, esp with D color, but it''s not usually so much. The basic proportions are great. GIA rounds their measurements so it might be a little outside what''s on the report, but not by much. Although VG finish will not be visibly different from EX it can imply more variance/less cut precision in the craftsmanship. We could tell a bit better with a Sarin scan and an ideal-scope image would allow much more meaningful comments. Without them we can only speculate.

 

[Chase035]

Thanks John. That was helpful. Any other opinions short of what I''d obtain from a Sarin report.

 

[Chase035]

John,

I''ve seen conflicting reports of where this falls on the AGS scale. If I plug it into HCA it says it lies in the region thats considered Excellent/Ideal by AGS and GIA. Although I''ve read in an earlier post (I believe by you) that, for a 59 table, 34 and 40.8 angles do not fall into the AGS Ideal range. Which is it, most likely? Does the Depth (60.2) push the stone into the AGS0 range?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/18/2007 5:59:01 PM
Author: Chase035
John,

I've seen conflicting reports of where this falls on the AGS scale. If I plug it into HCA it says it lies in the region thats considered Excellent/Ideal by AGS and GIA. Although I've read in an earlier post (I believe by you) that, for a 59 table, 34 and 40.8 angles do not fall into the AGS Ideal range. Which is it, most likely? Does the Depth (60.2) push the stone into the AGS0 range?

No way to know for sure without sending it to AGS. They grade each diamond's light performance individually. Things like optical symmetry and consistency come into play so diamond X may get AGS0 where diamond Y, cut with bad minor choices, inconsistency, etc, doesn't (even though they appear the same on paper). That's why an ideal-scope image would help. As a professional I can only give an estimate with the info handy. AGS provides general cutting guidelines to manufacturers. In the 0.25ct size range they predict 0 light performance for 59/40.8/34, depending on minors/optical symmetry etc (attachment) and that's a good indicator.

With rounds I like to say the numbers are like having a description of a blind date. Actual photos and reflector images are like seeing a picture of her, but you have to actually take that diamond out on a live date to be sure the descriptions bear out and her character suits you. To that end BN has a good exam/return period, in case you decide to punch her dance card.

 

[Chase035]

Thanks a bunch.