Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Is this EGL-USA 1.51 ct a good deal?

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
J

jrb23

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 16, 2009
Messages
15
I have been looking for a round brilliant diamond for an e-ring for about 2 weeks. I''m aiming for the 1.5 to 1.8 range, and trying to stay under $10K for the rock, and preferably under $10K for the whole thing. Today I saw one that seems like quite a value. Thoughts? Here are the specs:

EGL USA (US prefix, meaning NY lab, I believe) Graded in 2007.

Ct: 1.51
Dim: 7.59 - 7.50 x 4.50
Cut Grade: EGL Ideal
Color: F
Clarity: SI2
Depth: 59.6%
Table: 58%
Crown: 12.4%
Pav: 42.9%
Polish: VG
Sym: VG
Flor: Faint Blue

The cert shows Hearts & Arrows. The HCA score is 1.9 - Excellent. The concern here, it seems to me, is clarity. I looked at some GIA SI2''s today, and the ones I saw were not eye-clean to me. One had visible carbon speck on the side, and one had a bad twining wisp that looked almost like a chip or scratch when faced up. This EGL one did seem to be eye-clean. Through the loupe, it looked like quite a few small whitish inclusions. Arguably, a ton. I guess I would say that if I tried to count them I could find 15-20. But nothing major that I could see when not looking through the loupe. And it didn''t really seem to make the thing look cloudy either. Just as sparkly as the excellent cut GIA''s. The color was probably more like a GIA G, but we put it next to a GIA H and was definitely less yellow than the H.

Quote was $7490. Good deal?

Thanks in advance.
 
Will have obstruction issue, pavilion is much too shallow.
 
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
 
Thanks! Also considering this one. It is a few thousand more, but still within budget:

GIA -graded 2008
Color: H
Cut: Excellent
7.32 (that may be off; difficult to read on cert copy) - 7.40 x 4.56
Carat: 1.51
Clarity: SI1
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: Ex
Flor: None
Depth: 62.0%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.5
Pav Angle: 40.8

It appears eye-clean to me. Will be looking at yet more tomorrow.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:47:01 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Will have obstruction issue, pavilion is much too shallow.
Click to expand...

SC, will this be noticeable to a significant enough degree to recommend avoiding this diamond? I'm not trying to go RD on you here; I'm just looking at the OP's (rather ambitious) goal of getting a 1.5ct for <9-10k... I suppose it can be done, but I only see other SI2's that barely come in under $10k, so if the OP is happy with this one, perhaps he should go with it?

In any case, OP, is it possible to get an IS image?

eta: For both, but the numbers on the 2nd are much better...
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...

No way you can see it under normal, day to day conditions. Just stupid, irrational theory that has been propagating in the jewelry industry for years and taken as truth.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 5:17:37 PM
Author: tonyc2387
Date: 12/16/2009 4:47:01 PM

Author: Stone-cold11

Will have obstruction issue, pavilion is much too shallow.
Click to expand...

SC, will this be noticeable to a significant enough degree to recommend avoiding this diamond? I''m not trying to go RD on you here; I''m just looking at the OP''s (rather ambitious) goal of getting a 1.5ct for <9-10k... I suppose it can be done, but I only see other SI2''s that barely come in under $10k, so if the OP is happy with this one, perhaps he should go with it?

In any case, OP, is it possible to get an IS image?

eta: For both, but the numbers on the 2nd are much better...
Click to expand...

If he can live with it, since he has seen it, he can check on it''s effect now that he knows it is there and what to look for. Might be significant, might not, depending on the facets alignment and how big the lower half is.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 5:14:00 PM
Author: jrb23
Thanks! Also considering this one. It is a few thousand more, but still within budget:

GIA -graded 2008

Color: H

Cut: Excellent

7.32 (that may be off; difficult to read on cert copy) - 7.40 x 4.56
Carat: 1.51
Clarity: SI1
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: Ex
Flor: None
Depth: 62.0%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.5
Pav Angle: 40.8

It appears eye-clean to me. Will be looking at yet more tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Looks promising. What is the lower half number for this?
 
Date: 12/16/2009 5:14:00 PM
Author: jrb23
Thanks! Also considering this one. It is a few thousand more, but still within budget:

GIA -graded 2008
Color: H
Cut: Excellent
7.32 (that may be off; difficult to read on cert copy) - 7.40 x 4.56
Carat: 1.51
Clarity: SI1
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: Ex
Flor: None
Depth: 62.0%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.5
Pav Angle: 40.8

It appears eye-clean to me. Will be looking at yet more tomorrow.
Click to expand...
This one could have potential. Since you are looking at these in person, make sure to check how they look under different lighting conditions. The showroom lights in jewelry stores can make any stone look good. Check out the diamonds in daylight, under fluorescent office-type lighting and in low light if possible to make sure they don''t go dark in the center.

And ditto SC on the faint fluoro. Most people don''t notice fluoro until strong or very strong--even medium fluorescence goes unseen in normal viewing.
 
Additional stats for the second stone:

Crown = 16.0%
Pav = 43.0%
Girdle = Medium (faceted)
Culet = none
HCA Score = 2.6

Price quoted just over $10K.
 
Still need the lower half number (also know as lgf%) It will be on the grading report diamond diagram lower left. Should be around 75% or 80%
 
I guess I didn''t know what that lower half number was. It is 80% for the second stone (the H, SI1).

The only other number on the cert for that stone is 50%. That is the number shown in the upper left (just to the left of the table % number).
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...
Ummmm... no.
 
Are you willing to drop color? That is another way to get into your preferred size while maintaining cut quality.
 
Not willing to drop color below GIA-H, and even that is pushing it. I am willing to drop clarity down to SI2, as long as it''s eye-clean. Budget really could go (all the way) up to $11 or possibly closer to $12 for the right stone, but my goal is to get a good one at $10.
 
that lower half look promising then.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.


Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.


Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...
With faint blue? I strongly disagree. I would be careful with strong blue, or very strong blue, but even then it's not noticeable.

--Joshua
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...
Strongly disagree with this also. Also fluorescence has nothing to do with fire or coloured light, that is down to cut quality and proportioning.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 5:17:37 PM
Author: tonyc2387

Date: 12/16/2009 4:47:01 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Will have obstruction issue, pavilion is much too shallow.
Click to expand...

SC, will this be noticeable to a significant enough degree to recommend avoiding this diamond? I''m not trying to go RD on you here; I''m just looking at the OP''s (rather ambitious) goal of getting a 1.5ct for <9-10k... I suppose it can be done, but I only see other SI2''s that barely come in under $10k, so if the OP is happy with this one, perhaps he should go with it?

In any case, OP, is it possible to get an IS image?

eta: For both, but the numbers on the 2nd are much better...
Click to expand...
With obstruction if the viewer knows what to look for it has to come down to whether it bothers them or not.
 
Date: 12/17/2009 6:22:00 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...
Strongly disagree with this also. Also fluorescence has nothing to do with fire or coloured light, that is down to cut quality and proportioning.
Click to expand...
I also disagree with this. I would love to have a D, E, or F colored stone with medium to strong blue fluorescence. I think that is a beautiful look.
 
Thanks for all the input. I have decided against the EGL-USA stone (NOT because of the slight blue fl.). I''m still considering the GIA H-SI1 from the B&M store, as well as the two that were suggested from James Allen. I have ordered the Idealscopes for the two James Allen stones, and I have arranged to get a look at the Idealscope of the H-SI1 in person tomorrow.

I think if the Idealscope on the 1.61 ct James Allen stone comes back good, I would probably go with that one. It''s slightly bigger, slightly better clarity (VS2, although not seeing the inclusions in person concerns me a little), and it''s the same price as the one at the B&M store.
 
Date: 12/16/2009 4:50:54 PM
Author: bluegenie
I wouldnt suggest buying a Faint Blue fluorescent stone if you are buying a colorless or near colorless diamond.

Out in the sun these stones look just like a cut piece of glass.

Always avoid fluorescence. In Colors K , L , M fluuorescence improves fire but in white stones not suggested.
Click to expand...
I recently bought and F stone with faint blue flour, and I couldn''t find any problem with it. When I put it under UV light, the flour is not even visible.
 
OK, one last question. Thanks for all the help so far.

The 1.61 H VS2 from James Allen that was suggested seems to be the best fit. I''m still waiting for the IdealScope from James Allen, but I expect it will look good, given the HCA score. My only worry now is that this VS2 is eye clean to me. The inclusions appear concentrated, and right under the table. Not to mention the "Additional clouds not shown" indicated on the cert. It actually looks fairly included for a VS2. Here''s the James Allen pic and virtual loupe:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1239701.asp

Would you expect this to look eye clean? The slightly smaller H-SI1 that I''ve been looking at in person (from B&M) is really pretty good with the naked eye.
 
You do not need to worry about "additional clouds not shown". It is almost always listed on certs. If the inclusions mattered they would be listed as a grade making inclusion, which is the list of inclusions under the inclusion plot.

I would not worry *at all* about a VS2! The definition means that the inclusions are difficult to see using a loupe. These inclusions are in nearly every case impossible to see with the naked eye from any angle. This inclusions grade is considered very safe to buy around these parts. But JA can also tell you about the inclusions. They will ne honest, so call and ask.

ETA Lokoed at the diamond. You can't see inclusions in the photo, I think it is safe to say you will not see them with your naked eye.

BTW do check the IS. The HCA is not a substitution and doesn't guarantee a great IS. A great IS supercedes the HCA but not the reverse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top