Is Girdle 1.5% - 4.2% ok?

[scooby]

Hi,

I am considering a AGS000 Round stone but the girdle says 1.5% - 4.2%. Is this fluctuation bad? How about the depth, table, crown and pavilion angles? does it look like one that will sparkle a lot?

here is the stats from the AGS report:

8.06 - 8.09 x 5.03 mm
AGS Ideal 0
light Performance: 0
Proportion Factors: 0
Polish : Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Weight : 2.025 Ct.

Depth: 62.2%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 34.8
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion: 43%
Crown: 15.4%

Thanks,

scooby

 

[valeria101]

I wouldn't know why to call the girdle sway 'bad'. It's rather large allright, but everyhting else about the stone is very reassuring.

If this wasn't AGS0, perhaps that variation could have meant a the girdle plane is tilted or there is some other symmetry jolt somewhere.

What does the clarity plot look like? A 'natural' or some other thing could make just one tiny patch of girdle thick like that leaving the rest allot closer to 1.5% than 4%. It happens. I wouldn't worry about this sort of thing.

4% all around would give a 'slightly thick girdle' (is it? can't find that table...) - and while I have no reason to call it 'bad' I can't say I am the most enthusiastic admirer either. Neither is GIA - their new cut grading system allows 'thin' to 'slightly thick' for the top grade. If given a chance I would listen to them.

Are there any pictures? Have you had a chance to see it?


Just my 0.2, of course

 

[scooby]

Here is the plot from ags report. Its a SI1.

 

[Demelza]

Like Ana, I don''t know if it''s bad per se, but the stone is a bit deep and clearly some of the weight is hiding in the girdle which means that the stone won''t face up as large as a slightly shallower stone. A well-cut 2ct stone should be about 8.2mm. Whether that extra tenth of a mm will matter to you, only you can know. It sounds like it''s probably a good performer.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/5/2005 3:20:10 PM
Author: scooby
Here is the plot from ags report. Its a SI1.

Thaks. I can''t see any mark on the girdle, and the diameter may say that the 4.2% thick segments are all around the stone. perhaps because of a twist of facets (dug or painted...).

It would take someone more picky to run from that.

Angles are a good start to guess brilliance, but the most precise jusdgement still needs the stone to be there. Either pictures or the opportunity to see it while some return policy takes effect should do the rest.

The clarity grade and whatever that red patch is under the table are reason enough to see the stone before the sale becomes final anyway. SIs are great, but not the greatest recipe for blind purchases (as if anything were).

You know what? 2cts is impressive to start with. I hope we get to see this on the forum too!

 

[valeria101]

Well, I don''t know the color and price of your find, but here''s one with nearly the same girdle measurements. The IS shows this is due to ''painting'' ( a twist of facets pushes their edges ever so slightly away and creates larger patches on the girdle section - sorry for the very rough wording... there''s better if you run a search). In this particular stone the effect looked after should have been that girdle-to-girdle red on the IS image and this means ever so slightly more brighteness around the edges. It shows more on the IS than in person, some wrote. Obviously, this was relevant enough for the cuter to do it though and I can''t know any better.

Here it is: 2.04 I-Si1

Girdle: 1.5 - 4.3
Diameter: 8.22-8.24

IS:

I can''t know if your stone is like this. But this is one nice thing girdle variation comes with

- just an example.