JA Common Prong ring width options

[DomerD]

I decided on the diamond -- Cushion Cut FSI1, 1.72c

I love the JA Common Prong ring in yellow gold for her, but trying to decide between the two widths they have.

1.9mm width, 20 diamonds, .3c -- http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/settings-with-sidestones/ring/item_58-2802.asp

2.2mm width, 18 diamonds, .5c -- http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/settings-with-sidestones/ring/item_58-2854.asp

She loves simple, delicate jewelry. All her rings are tiny and thin which leads me to lean towards the 1.9mm one. My only concern is that the diamond will look awkwardly big on the smaller ring. My thinking is that the stone may "fit" better on the slightly wider ring. I am wrong here?

She is a size 6 if that changes anything..

Thanks for the input!

 

[slg47]

I would go with the 2.2 mm...that is still very delicate but more sturdy.

 

[centralsquare]

I think it would look lovely on the 1.9mm...it would really highlight the stone. But 2.2mm isn't that much larger.

 

[minmin001]

how about this one? http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/Scroll-Basket-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html
it starts thin in the center then the bottom is normal width which makes it sturdy. six prong makes the stone more secure and appears bigger. this is the setting I have and I totally love it.

 

[slg47]

how about this one? http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/Scroll-Basket-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html
it starts thin in the center then the bottom is normal width which makes it sturdy. six prong makes the stone more secure and appears bigger. this is the setting I have and I totally love it.

I would do 4 prong with a cushion...

 

[Amys Bling]

how about this one? http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/Scroll-Basket-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html
it starts thin in the center then the bottom is normal width which makes it sturdy. six prong makes the stone more secure and appears bigger. this is the setting I have and I totally love it.

I would do 4 prong with a cushion...

Ditto- definitely four prong for a cushion. Also there isn't a huge difference between the 1.9 and 2.2 setting. With a stone that size the 2.2 will still look really thin and delicate but yet it will be sturdier than the 1.9- IMHO.

 

[tyty333]

I would do 2.2 with that size stone. It will still look very delicate but give the rock good support.

 

[DomerD]

Survey says... 2.2! Can't wait to see it in the setting. I'm opting for the 2.2, not too much price difference for the durability.

Thanks for all of the help.

 

[karpouzi]

Did you look at the JA pictures of the ring set with various diamonds? I'm not sure if these links will work, but they have the .30 ctw set with a 1.81 ct cushion:

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagemen...nes/1480/Engagement-Ring-With-Sidestones.html

and the .54 ctw with a 1.8 (square) cushion:

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagemen...nes/4196/Engagement-Ring-With-Sidestones.html

These are both in white metals but they give you an idea of proportions. Personally I think either one would be lovely

 

[minmin001]

how about this one? http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/Scroll-Basket-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html
it starts thin in the center then the bottom is normal width which makes it sturdy. six prong makes the stone more secure and appears bigger. this is the setting I have and I totally love it.

I would do 4 prong with a cushion...

oh oppps, didn't see it's a cushion...