Is this a good deal and diamond?

[Fuzzy]

I''m about to purchase the following GIA diamond. This is the best deal I''ve found so far. What do you think about it?

Cut Round
Carat: 1.11
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Price: $ 4700
Measurements: 6.72X6.78X4.07 mm
Depth Percentage: 60.3 %
Table Percentage: 60 %
Girdle: THN-MEDF
Culet: NO
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: N


Thanks in advance. The Sarin report is on the way.

 

[Mara]

Well pricing looks good! The Table/Depth could be interesting, when you get the Sarin, people will be able to tell you more. Sometimes the 60/60 combo is not that attractive, but others say they have seen some really great 60/60 stones.

Post the sarin results when you have them!

Run them through the HCA as well for a score.

 

[Fuzzy]

Here's the Sarin info. It didn't score too well on the HCA, but the dealer says it's very nice. (Obviously)

Crown: 33.8 degrees
Pavillion: 41.6 degrees

 

[Mara]

Yikes...on the HCA this is a 5.1. Good, Fair, Fair, Excellent. I would pass on this stone. Why? Because it probably won't look very good to your naked eye. It may sparkle and look pretty, but it won't return the fire and brilliance that a well cut stone SHOULD. The HCA is not the definitive last word on a stone, but it does help in weeding out the duds (I would classify a potential dud as over 3.0 HCA score). I also wouldn't consider a stone that had two 'fair' ratings on the HCA, as that is only one level or so above the bottom!

However, the price on this stone is VERY attractive. A well cut H VS2 1.11c should go for around $6k if not a little more. So you are saving money by paying less for the mediocre cut, I don't know what your budget is, but if you can afford a well cut stone of around the same carat, color, clarity, I would recommend continuing to look. If not, and you are willing to compromise on the cut quality to get a bigger stone, maybe this is the stone for you. It's my opinion though that it is the cut that really makes the stone. I would go lower in ctw to get a better cut.

For comparison take a look at the following stone (which I found the lazy way..but going to 'Cut Quality' on Pricescope and searching on anything with an excellent HCA score). You may not want to buy online which is fine, but this stone would be considered by many to be excellently cut, so you can take a look at the pictures and angles/specs and see where your stone is 'off' as compared to this stone. This is a G VS2 1.09c for $6475.

http://www.niceice.com/certcopies/ags0003501606/index.htm

For a similar comparison, here is a stone 1.01c F SI1 excellently cut stone that is $5100. A few hundred more than what you are paying, but for a very different looking stone. The 1.11 or 1.09 will look bigger, but I can guarantee you that if you put the 1.11c vs this 1.01 OR the 1.09, you will see a huge difference in sparkle and the overall look of the stones.

http://www.niceice.com/certcopies/gia12140200/index.htm

Anyway in the end the decision is yours. Hope this helps a bit.

Good luck!

 

[Giangi]

The pavilion is a bit deep... Maybe this isn't the best looking diamond in the world, but probably your seller is right and the stone is nice...The price is right too... I don't know if you prefer to save money or to get a better looking stone at a higher price... The $5100 one that Mara posted sounds interesting...

 

[Fuzzy]

Thanks for your input.

I think I'm going to give it a shot. I definately want a nice stone, but this is the top of my budget and everything else looks good about the diamond. I could go a little smaller, but I'm going to get it and see. I have 15 days to review it and send it back if I don't like it. Hopefully the dealer is right.

 

[Giangi]

Good idea! Let us know your opinions!

 

[Fuzzy]

I just got another Sarin report for a different diamond. (same dealer).

1.05 Carat, H, VS1, No Culet, Faint Fl.
Depth 59.2%
Table 57.4%
Crown 32.9 degrees
Pavillion 40.3 degrees

The HCA rates this one as a 1.2 and has excellent results. The sarin report rates the Pavillion as a 2 though and the crown is a 1.

My dealer still insists that the 1.11 diamond is a nicer stone, and I'm going to take his word on it. He has a good reputation and would get my business either way, so I can't see why he'd sell the worse stone.

Am I making the right move?

 

[Mara]

No.

The second stone quite obviously has better specs, even if the crown and pav are a little shallow. Wonder what the dimensions are on this baby, I wouldn't be surprised if it looked a little bigger than a 1.05c.

The first stone looks like a dud according to the HCA. Now of course you made a good point, your jeweler is going to get your biz either way, so why would he lie? Maybe he's not. Maybe to his eye the 1.11 does look better. But man..the difference in the HCA between stone #1 and stone #2 is HUGE and he says the first one looks better? Get the guy some eyeglasses. There is no way in my mind a 5.1 HCA scorer will look better than a 1.2. I can allow for some miscalculations or interpretations of the data but...no.

I would suggest viewing both stones in person before purchasing. Let YOUR eyes make the decision, not the jewelers. But on paper the second stone sounds better to me...much much much much better. Did I say much?

Good luck!

 

[Fuzzy]

Ok. Now I'm leaning towards the smaller stone, despite the dealer recommendation. That HCA is a strong factor in the decision. Is this accurate or just an opinionated calculation?

I've attached the very basic Sarin report which has the dimesions. I don't know what's up with this brief report, but it has what I need for now. Does this look good?

On this report what is the "2" referring to on the last colum in the first row?

Thanks.

 

[Mara]

The 2 refers to the fact that this stone is an AGS 2 because of the pavilion angle. Everything else looks like AGS 0 except for the pav angle, so AGS takes the 2 and makes it the cut of the stone. Even if all else is 0. It's an interesting way of grading cut. I think you said the crown was an AGS 1...that's okay.

Maybe Rich can post DiamCalc's for both stones. That may show you what the numbers do not. I bet the 5.1 stone will have either alot of light leakage or some leakage in the table etc. The DC will just be simulations but they can turn out to be amazingly accurate as some of the DC's we have seen on here matched against IdealScope images look very similar!!

Rich are you out there? Help us out please!

 

[Fuzzy]

Ok, now I see what the dealer's been talking about. He's comparing them as an AGS1 vs an AGS2. So which is better? Smaller stone is about $200 less, but I'm interested in the best stone out of the 2.
So is that "2" pavillion cut enough to avoid this diamond or does everything else about it void that?

I've attached the Sarin for the 1.11ct diamond for analysis/comparison.

I'd like to make a move on this on Thurs. so any quick help is greatly appreciated.

(Sorry for the huge image)

 

[Giangi]

The 1.05 H VS 1 looks better to me...

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hiya Fuzzy. An interesting choice of stones, which demonstrates the helpfulness of visual optical analysis in addition to traditional technical optical analysis. The first POSSIBLE simulated IdealScope image is the 1.12, and the second POSSIBLE image is the 1.05.

Here's the POSSIBLE DiamCalc Light Return Analysis on both stones:

............................................1.12..........................1.05
Light Return (mono)…...: 0.96 V.Good...............0.93 V.Good to Good
Light Return (stereo)…..: 0.99 Very Good...............0.93 V.Good to Good
(Non) Leakage (mono)..: 0.70 Good to Fair...............1.06 V.Good to Exc.
(Non) Leakage (stereo).: 0.77 Good........................1.09 V.Good to Exc.
Contrast............................: 0.96 V.Good...............0.97 V.Good
(Non) FishEye Effect…...: 1.00 V.Good...............1.00 V. Good

-----------
IdealScope- In general, the darker pink areas indicate areas of greater light return, with the lighter pink areas indicating areas of lesser light return. The black areas indicate areas of greater contrast, with the gray areas indicating areas of lesser contrast. The white areas indicate areas of light leakage. A good explanation of the IdealScope image along with examples can be found at https://www.pricescope.com/idealscope_indx.asp

Disclaimer- The facet arrangement and symmetry of the image will probably vary from your actual diamond, which may affect the light performance indicated. The computer generates an image with “perfect” symmetry, which is rare. Also, the star/lower girdle facet lengths may be different from your diamond. The computer simulation is reproduced best when the actual diamond is being viewed and the image "tweaked" to the appearance of the diamond, or Sarin info is downloaded directly into the program. However, this "blind" reproduction should be helpful in considering the major light performance aspects.
-----------

Although the 1.12 has slightly better light return characteristics, it leaks far more light than the 1.05.

I'd go for the 1.05, if your eye (a superior instrument) confirms these findings. Besides the better light performance, it's almost the same diameter as the 1.12 and one clarity grade better.

 

[fire&ice]

Keep in mind HCA discounts quite a bit for larger tables. Giangi - I thought you were the one that loved 60/60 stones.

Is there any way you could view both? You may be able to predict performance; but, it is your *eyes* that make the determination.

Good luck.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

1.11 ct.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

1.05 ct.

 

[Fuzzy]

Wow! Thanks for that very useful info. That's helps.

That info makes me feel a bit better about the 1.12. The leakage results aren't the greatest though.

Well this adds to a tough decision.
Just spoke with the dealer again and he is still quite insistant that the 1.12 is a better stone. While I do like and trust numbers, I need to trust his eye and expertise since I can't see the stones yet.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Thanks again!