shape
carat
color
clarity
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. PriceScope Upgrade Completed
    For issues, questions and comments click the link below
    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pricescope-upgraded-comments-and-issues.229551/

    Dismiss Notice

Need help from the pros

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by New2diamondS, Jan 26, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. New2diamondS
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    by New2diamondS » Jan 26, 2004
    I''ve finally found the setting that I''m going to get and now need to find a diamond. I''m interested in the 2 diamonds below and would like everyone''s opinion.

    Report: AGS
    Shape: A Cut Above H&A
    Carat: 1.200
    Color: F
    Clarity: SI1
    Depth: 60.4
    Table: 56
    Crown Angle: 34.8
    Crown %: 15.1
    Pavilion Angle: 40.9
    Pavilion %: 43.1
    Girdle: 1.0%-1.4%
    Polish: Ideal
    Symmetry: Ideal
    Culet: Pointed
    Fluorescence: Negligible
    Measurements: 6.93-6.95X4.19
    Price: $7,835.00

    Report: AGS
    Shape: Round Ideal Cut
    Carat: 1.233
    Color: G
    Clarity: VS1
    Depth: 60.9
    Table: 56
    Crown Angle: 34.9
    Crown %: 15.4
    Pavilion Angle: 41
    Pavilion %: 43.1
    Girdle: 1.0%-0.7% FACETED
    Polish: Excellent
    Symmetry: Excellent
    Culet: Pointed
    Fluorescence: Negligible
    Measurements: 6.94-6.97X4.24
    Price: $7,626.00
     
  2. New2diamondS
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
  3. Patty
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,042
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2003
    by Patty » Jan 26, 2004
    I'm no expert by any mean, especially when it comes to the angles and measurements. But to me, the decision here is between color and clarity. If the SI1 stone is eye-clean, the color F would be attractive to me over the G. And the size is almost exactly the same measurement-wise. The general consensus here is why pay for clarity you can't see and that may be the case with the VS1, although that stone is less expensive. The first one is listed as Hearts and Arrows. I'm not sure what the difference is between "excellent" and "ideal" when it comes to AGS grading polish and symmetry. I'm sure someone else here can tell you that.
     
  4. aljdewey
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    9,121
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    by aljdewey » Jan 26, 2004
    Just based on the numbers......I'd go with the ACA stone...the F.




    I think the second stone is overpaying for clarity that you cannot see. As long as the F, SI is eyeclean, I'd choose that stone hands down.




    Why? For a couple of hundred more, you get a better color, superideal proportions (40.9 crown angle is MUCH more desired than the 41 to preserve the H&A pattern if you're into that), AND the brand.




    Plus, WF gives PS members a discount, so the difference in price is going to be even more nominal once you factor that in!
     
  5. pqcollectibles
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,441
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    by pqcollectibles » Jan 26, 2004
    The F, SI1, ACA diamond scores 1.6, Ex/Vg/Vg/Vg on the HCA and is Price Scope priced at $7443.

    The G, VS1 diamond scores 2.1, Vg/Vg/Vg/Vg on the HCA with a comment of "Worth buying if the price is right." Average asking price among Price Scope Vendors for comparable diamonds is $7425.

    You would need to contact White Flash to get info on the inclusions and an Ideal Scope image. If the F, SI1 is eye clean, it looks like the better deal, in both performance and price.[​IMG]
     
  6. Mara
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    31,003
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    by Mara » Jan 26, 2004
    From the data given, #1 hands down.




    1) The angles are great, better than #2.


    2) It's an H&A AGS0 with an excellent HCA score above the other stone.


    3) As PQ noted, WF gives a discount for Pscope members, so the price is actually LESS than the non H&A ACA stone, plus you get a name brand for free...fun.


    4) Both stones are the same average diameter, so even though one weighs .03c more..it won't show up a bit up top to the eye.




    Make sure it's eye clean. Eye clean means that for all you know or care, it could be a VS1...so why pay more for it?




    ACA. [​IMG]
     
  7. New2diamondS
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    by New2diamondS » Jan 27, 2004
    Thanks for your responses everyone! [​IMG]

    Bare with be since I'm a n00bie to all this....
    I liked the first one also, but was hesitant because it was SI1. Since it is an SI1, would it affect the light return because of the inclusions as opposed to a VS1?
     
  8. fire&ice
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    7,828
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    by fire&ice » Jan 27, 2004
    Typically, an SI1 will not effect the stone's brilliance, etc. Rarely, it will effect transparancy. Your problem w/ an SI1 is whether it is eye clean. Ask WF to examine. It should be fine.
     
  9. Giangi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,530
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    by Giangi » Jan 27, 2004
    I would go with #1 as well. Usually SI 1's are clean to the naked eye in face-up position... As F&I has wisely suggested, ask Brian to have a look at the stone for you and maybe you could get some magnified pictures too... In this way you could get an idea of the inclusions (plots mean very little-they have only 2 dimensions), their location, brightness and visibility, as well as an overall impression of the stone. [​IMG]
     
  10. aljdewey
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    9,121
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    by aljdewey » Jan 27, 2004
    Well, I can tell you that I bought an SI2 stone from them.....and it's completely eyeclean.




    Keep in mind that ACA stones are AGS graded, and AGS is typically quite strict on their grading, so I'll echo the others. The SI1 should be fine, but speak directly with Brian and ask him to tell you what he sees when he views the stone.




    Whatever he says, believe it. He's never steered anyone wrong, and he's always right on the money.
     
  11. Mara
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    31,003
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    by Mara » Jan 27, 2004
    No, pretty much the only way a diamond's sparkle would be affected by inclusions would be with an I1+ grading or similar, chances are with a top quality SI1...you will not even see a thing...and the diamond will definitely not be impaired.
     
  12. roshita
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2003
    by roshita » Jan 28, 2004
    Most experts would say that ideal/ideal is quite a bit better than ex/ex. As far as the trade marketplace, there is a great difference in price for ideal/ideal over ex/ex.

    The F SI1 has a slightly tighter variation on the diameter measurement. It also has a slightly tighter variation on the girdle thickness. The polish and symmetry are ideal. With the information given, it should be the better looking stone. However, the SI1 may be a factor in your decision.
     
  13. Mara
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    31,003
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    by Mara » Jan 28, 2004


    AGS has ID/ID and GIA has EX/EX. Aren't they the same in terms of the grading structure? E.g. ID=EX just by different labs? Please clarify if that is not the case since that is the first we have heard of this on here...and we have a few well-known experts on-hand.



    As for difference in price..show a GIA EX EX that is priced significantly lower that a comparable cut (H&A)AGS ID ID. From what we see in terms of online pricing H&A stones...there is no real difference between the two grading labs in terms of price.




     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page