Opinions on 2 different AGS0 Round Diamonds - Tradeoffs?

[nodomo]

Looking to get opinions as I'm going back & forth wracking my brain between these these two. Both are AGS0 Ideal Cut and both have great HCA scores.

The first stone is 2.61ct I VS2, very very clean and only a few tiny inclusions under microsope. The second stone is 3.22ct I SI2, nice & big with awesome HCA score, but there's a lot more stuff going on with SI2 clarity esp when viewed under the microscope. Both look great to my naked eye but the 3.22 may have a visible inclusion that could be hidden under a prong when set.

Thoughts & Opinions? Which is the preferred & keeper?

Stone #1
2.61 Carat Round Brilliant
Measurement 8.82 x 8.86 x 5.47
Color I
Clarity VS2
Cut AGS Ideal 0
Polish Ideal
Symmetry Ideal
Light Performance 0
Proportion Factors 0
Flourescence None
Girdle slightly thin to slightly thick
Table 55.5%
Depth 62.0%
Crown Angle 34.3%
Pavilion Angle 41.0%
Pointed/No Cutlet
HCA Score 1.7



Stone #2
3.22 Carat Round Brilliant
Measurement 9.54 x 9.63 x 5.76
Color I
Clarity SI2
Cut AGS Ideal 0
Polish Ideal 0
Symmetry Ideal 0
Light Performance Ideal 0
Flourescence None
Girdle Thin to slightly thick
Table 57.9%
Depth 60.1%
Crown Angle 33.8%
Pavilion Angle 40.7%
Pointed/No Cutlet
HCA Score 0.7

 

[50shadesofblack]

I realize my opinion may not be popular here, but honestly, I'd go with the smaller one of better clarity. I do not care much for carat weight of the diamond and would always cut down on carat for clarity.

My personal preference is get the best cut, then go down to max. VS clarity and at least I colour, then see which diamonds are available and pick carat the last, based on the budget.

Edit:
I see now that HCA score is better on the bigger one. Urgh. I'd go with the one that you think "shines" more only if the inclusions were not visible to the naked eye and were somewhere on the side. Personally, I'd still probably choose the smaller one.

 

[chicam]

From my limited understanding, an HCA of 0.7 is no better than a higher one so long as higher one is still less than 2.

 

[ame]

I prefer the higher clarity and smaller table of the first one. Both are an HCA under two so they're both "equal" in that term.

 

[marymm]

I also tend to prefer a smaller table, so the I-VS2 gets a point there.

It sounds like you've actually seen both stones but your first post says "there may be a visible inclusion" in the I-SI2 -- did you see the inclusion or not? Were you unable to see it but someone else could? Is this for an ER or another purpose? Is it meant to be a forever stone or might it be upgraded in the future?

If it were me, and the I-SI2 was eye-clean to MY satisfaction, and price / vendor policies were otherwise equal, in this case I would likely go with the larger stone. BUT, if I were buying it for someone else, and the I-SI2 inclusion *could* be visible to those with better eyesight than me, then I would choose the smaller stone.

 

[nodomo]

Thanks for the feedback everyone - I appreciate it.

This stone would be for an ER. I have both stones in my possession for evaluation and need to decide soon. On the I SI2, I cannot see the inclusions myself, but the vendor's gemologist commented that "there's 1 or 2 small visible inclusion on the top edge that could be hidden by a prong set." Also, under a microscope, I thought the SI2 stone looks a bit busy compared to the VS2 stone.

For the SI2, I'm not sure our mutual friends/family can see the visible inclusions with their normal eyesight. My guess is only the experts or real diamond fanatics can see it.

 

[minmin001]

I'm voting for the smaller one as well..

 

[armywife13]

I agree with others, I would go with the smaller of the two....I cringe calling it small though, because it's still a very large, substantial diamond. The higher clarity is definitely important to me, more important to me than increasing the size.

 

[slg47]

have you seen both on your hand? which do you like the look of more?

 

[nodomo]

I've seen both diamonds in person - they are both loose stones so the best I could do was lay them in between my fingers to see sorta see what it would look like on a finger. I like them equally as they both sparkle and face up really well.

 

[marchesa6989]

if the larger one is eye clean/prongable i'm gonna go against the grain and say bigger is better! if they're both sparkly and noone can see any flaws, why wouldn't you go bigger. and you know AGS000 is a fantastic cut and will perform well. but then again i'm more of a bling girl

 

[nodomo]

I decided to pass on stone #2 (3.22ct) but found another one that intrigues me. This one is a GIA 3.01 H SI2, Triple Excellent, HCA 1.7. It's priced really well ($28k) but that's because of a black crystal inclusion in the middle of the table.

I'm curious about what the PS community thinks. Yes, the downside is the black inclusion, but the upside is the price, excellent cut & HCA score, and it's 1 color grade higher than what I had been looking at.

I've asked the vendor/cutter for a non-magnified view so I can see what it might look like to the naked eye. The stone is overseas so there would be some logistics & costs in getting it over to the U.S. for closer examination.

Stone #3
3.01 Carat Round Brilliant
Measurement 9.27 x 9.31 x 5.65
GIA Certified
Color H
Clarity SI2
Cut Excellent
Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
Flourescence None
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick
Table 59.0%
Depth 60.8%
Crown Angle 34.5%
Pavilion Angle 40.8%
Pointed/No Cutlet
HCA Score 1.7

 

[Dreamer_D]

I would consider an SI2 where the grade stting inclusions were "honest" ones, out on the periphery that can be pronged. I would not consider and SI2 with any table inclusions and especially not a black one like that H Si2.

When judging eye clean, take the stones into office lighitng, or outside, and in the shade under a table. Inclusions are most evident in low diffuse lighitng because there is less light coming back at your eyes. Also make sure there is a no questions asked refund policy in writing. I cannot tell yo uhow many people have bought a diamond and then taken it home only to spot nasty inclusions they could not see in the store, and been stuck because they did not make sure there was a refund policy.

 

[yssie]

I would consider an SI2 where the grade stting inclusions were "honest" ones, out on the periphery that can be pronged. I would not consider and SI2 with any table inclusions and especially not a black one like that H Si2.

When judging eye clean, take the stones into office lighitng, or outside, and in the shade under a table. Inclusions are most evident in low diffuse lighitng because there is less light coming back at your eyes. Also make sure there is a no questions asked refund policy in writing. I cannot tell yo uhow many people have bought a diamond and then taken it home only to spot nasty inclusions they could not see in the store, and been stuck because they did not make sure there was a refund policy.

Those tend to command almost-SI1 prices - no steals there. The market really does price itself w/ these sorts of things!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would consider an SI2 where the grade stting inclusions were "honest" ones, out on the periphery that can be pronged. I would not consider and SI2 with any table inclusions and especially not a black one like that H Si2.

When judging eye clean, take the stones into office lighitng, or outside, and in the shade under a table. Inclusions are most evident in low diffuse lighitng because there is less light coming back at your eyes. Also make sure there is a no questions asked refund policy in writing. I cannot tell yo uhow many people have bought a diamond and then taken it home only to spot nasty inclusions they could not see in the store, and been stuck because they did not make sure there was a refund policy.

Ditto...wouldn't even give this one a second look! But there would be very few SI2's that would be worth considering in this size range, especially because as Garry says, few will be truly eyeclean.

(You have a great choice in stone #1. I would choose that one!!!)

 

[Dancing Fire]

agree,#1 looks good by the specs..