Need help to split hairs!

[petersong]

I got these two specs. I really want to get some ideas from your experts.

Carat Depth Tbl Crn Pav Gdl Cul Pol Sym Flr Measurements

1.67 61.20% 57% 34.5° 41° 1.0-1.7 pt id id no 7.62-7.67*4.68

1.635 60.80% 55% 34.5° 40.9° 0.9%-1.4% pt id id no 7.66-7.68x4.66

Thanks.

 

[Lynn B]

Yep, Peter, you're trying to split hairs now.

But that's OK... you're in good company around here!

Based on the info provided, both stones look like they would be excellent performers - beautiful stones.

#1 gets 1.9 on the HCA
#2 gets 1.4

I am being REEEALLY picky now, but I lean towards #2. I like the smaller table, the slightly less depth, the shallower pav plus it's also slightly more "in round". Now mind you, I am NO expert, and these are just my humble opinions. And I am really nit-picking the numbers apart!

Have you seen an IS image? How about H&A images?
And what about the colors of the stones? The clarity grades? The prices?
Have you seen them in person? These all factor into the equation, too!

Lynn (who's been known to try to split a few hairs herself!

)

 

[Murph]

If you look at the cert for the 1.635 http://www.whiteflash.com/pimg/certificates/ci_AGS-3098102.gif You might question the age of the cert 2002 and look at the plot and wonder if this stone might have multiple open feathers on the girdle. This would explain why the stone is still available.

Cheers

Murph

 

[rockslover]

Yikes...Good work Murph..
i can''t tell from the cert if the imperfections are open or break the surface on the diamond but it looks like a low si1.

Peter,
The numbers on the stone look great but, you need to see the diamond with your own eyes.

Just my 2 cents

 

[longtimelurker]

Date: 7/20/2005 1:46:17 PM
Author: Murph
If you look at the cert for the 1.635 http://www.whiteflash.com/pimg/certificates/ci_AGS-3098102.gif You might question the age of the cert 2002 and look at the plot and wonder if this stone might have multiple open feathers on the girdle. This would explain why the stone is still available.

Cheers

Murph

Before I assumed this stone was in the inventory for 3 years, I''d call and ask. Another assumption could be that someone traded up & this stone was happily on someone''s finger for the last couple of years.

 

[belle]

ltl is right, an older date on the certificate does NOT mean that the diamond has been sitting around for 3 years. wf has a 100% lifetime trade up policy. my guess is somebody recently upgraded their bling!

 

[petersong]

Then I would like to say I do not want other''s rings even if it is the best in the world...

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/20/2005 3:55:28 PM

Author: belle

lt is right, an older date on the certificate does NOT mean that the diamond has been sitting around for 3 years. wf has a 100% lifetime trade up policy. my guess is somebody recently upgraded their bling!

Actually the diamond has been sitting around for a few billion years, folks.

This was not a trade-up. For the record, when someone does trade up a previous purchase, that diamond is always sent to GIA or AGS for complete re-grading.

This one has just not found the right home yet.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 7/20/2005 7:17:15 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

This one has just not found the right home yet.

John,

How perfect is THAT! It reminds me of those darling little puppies and kitties at the Humane Society, just waiting for the right family to come along and love them... it happens when it's right!

Still smiling...

Lynn

 

[Dancing Fire]

Peter
John Q said, it''s a new stone so call WF and talk to Brian about the inclusions.

 

[belle]

thanks for the clarification sir john. i should have realized that even an upgrade would need to be re-certed.
give it a chance petersong!