noob, rock comparison

[prince1]

Well, for my 1st post I should note: This is a great site. I''ve enjoyed reading posts here for some time.

Now, on to the question:

I''m looking at two stones. It''s a classic ''quality vs. size'' dilemma, with both options at virtually the same cost.

Diamond "A":
1.11 carat
E
VS2
60.5% depth
56% table
no flourescence
very good polish
good symmetry
Sarin report included

Diamond "B":
1.31 carat
F
SI1
61.4% depth
59% table
medium blue flourescence
very good polish
very good symmetry
obviously, a Sarin report is not necessary for this one...

Looking at both stones together, the smaller stone appears to be virtually the same size as the larger, which makes sense given the quality of the cut.

My intuition tells me to go for the quality of the ideal stone, but after looking around at a number of independents in my area, I''m coming to believe that the 1.31 is the more uncommon stone.

This purchase is for an engagement ring, and although I''m personally inclined to go for an ''ideal'' stone, I suspect my future fiance would appreciate knowing that her rock is a unique size.

Any/all comments appreciated, particularly if you''d like to take a guess at asking price for either of these stones.

Thanks!

 

[AndyRosse]

Well, first of all, you need Sarins on BOTH stones, not just the second.

Second, what is the girdle on both? I bet the second one is thick, because the depth is not overly deep at all.

Third, note the symmetry on the first stone. Many ideal stones around here are at least very good, if not excellent (though it is highly debated whether a regular consumer could even tell the difference)

Fourth, what are the measurements on both stones?

Fifth, what do you mean that the second stone is the more uncommon stone? Size-wise?

Finally, around here we always say, CUT IS KING! Think cut first, then everything else.

 

[AndyRosse]

Oh wait, I just reread your post. Can you please post the sarin for the first one? And why do you say that a sarin is not needed for the second?

 

[prince1]

since the 2nd stone is obviously *not* ideal, what''s the point of confirming it with Sarin?

as for the 1st stone (''Diamond A''), here are the details:

AGS 1.118 crt
diam 6.72
depth 4.07
crown 34.3 deg, 1.01mm, 15%
pavil 40.6 deg, 2.86mm, 42.6%
table 3.76mm, 56%
culet 0.6% very s
girdl 1.6% 1.3% med 2.1% sl thick

regarding my comment about the 1.31 being uncommon - I''m not seeing much inventory between .25 crt increments. Seems like most jewelers stock at 1crt, 1.25crt, 1.5crt, etc. I really can''t find another 1.31 stone in any of the local independent jewelers. Not much online either, for that matter - but I''m still doing my homework on this...

thanks!

 

[fire&ice]

What ARE the measurements in mm of each stone? Are they the same price?

 

[hoorray]

I don''t understand the wanting an unusual size by it''s number. If it looks better or decidedly different, then I get it, but who cares about the uniquness of the carat weight? I understand liking it because it is bigger, as long as it is still a beautiful stone with lots of life. You might want to get an idealscope to look at the light return performance on each stone, and look at them both in lots of different "normal" lighting -- not the bright jewelry store lighting. IMO, bigger is better as long as it''s still beautiful....

It also sounds as if your selection is lmited at your local shops. You might want to do some looking online before you make your decision.