ChuckStein
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 3
So, bought a very nice ring from Zales in 2003, their sku # 15418742. Ring stolen in 2008 !
So now I seek to replace it with something as close to original as possible.
Platinum ring.
Need help finding the right place to get the replacement since the sku is no longer available. Buy online like BlueNile, or some other place?
Here's info from my paperwork of original:
Zales sku 15418742
Diamonds graded by International Gemmological Institute, Inc., 579 5th Ave NY NY
0.39ct center, 0.35ct sides
all approx 4.63 x 4.59 x 2.77 mm
shape/cut octa modified brilliant (Octillion 8 sided 82 facets)
depth 60.1%
table 59%
clarity grade SI(1)/SI(2)
color (G-H)
17yrs later knowing a bit more about diamonds the original was not the highest of quality, but it did sparkle nice. $3799 was the price in 2003.
I would like to maybe get into H-VS1/VS2.
Side note, wife finger is 4-4.25 small! So a 1ct 3stone is as large as it can be, any more than that it rubs her other fingers. She also does not like tall rings, etc.
For a bit of visual, the original looked very close to this one
So now I seek to replace it with something as close to original as possible.
Platinum ring.
Need help finding the right place to get the replacement since the sku is no longer available. Buy online like BlueNile, or some other place?
Here's info from my paperwork of original:
Zales sku 15418742
Diamonds graded by International Gemmological Institute, Inc., 579 5th Ave NY NY
0.39ct center, 0.35ct sides
all approx 4.63 x 4.59 x 2.77 mm
shape/cut octa modified brilliant (Octillion 8 sided 82 facets)
depth 60.1%
table 59%
clarity grade SI(1)/SI(2)
color (G-H)
17yrs later knowing a bit more about diamonds the original was not the highest of quality, but it did sparkle nice. $3799 was the price in 2003.
I would like to maybe get into H-VS1/VS2.
Side note, wife finger is 4-4.25 small! So a 1ct 3stone is as large as it can be, any more than that it rubs her other fingers. She also does not like tall rings, etc.
For a bit of visual, the original looked very close to this one