Please help a newbie rate these stones

[gbone]

Trying to find a stone for an engagement ring and have these candidates so far. Two of them (#'s 2 & 3) are H&A stones, but not sure how much of a difference that makes in performance. Any advice/guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Diamond 1

Carat Size: 1.72
Measurements: 7.71 – 7.75 x 4.73 mm
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 61.2%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 34.8
Pavilion Angle: 41.1
Girdle: Med to Sl. Thick
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: Ex
Fluorescence: Faint
HCA:2.8
Price: $17,950
http://www.exceldiamonds.com/diamond/1775.html

Diamond 2

Carat Size: 1.625
Measurements: 7.52 – 7.54 x 4.66 mm
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 61.9%
Table: 56.4%
Crown Angle: 34.8
Pavilion Angle: 40.9
Girdle: Thin to Med
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Fluorescence: Negligible
HCA:1.8
Price: $17,418
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-2433967.htm#

Diamond 3

Carat Size: 1.7
Measurements: 7.72 – 7.74 x 4.73 mm
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.2%
Table: 55%
Crown Angle: 35.0
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Girdle: Thin to Med
Polish: VG
Symmetry: Ex
Fluorescence: Faint
HCA:1.5
Price: $20,405
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_details.aspx?idno=2362515
Cut Grade per the GIA report for this stone is Very Good. In the comments section of the GIA report, it says that the "Cut grade is based on brillianteering of the half-facets". Any idea what that means?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Sundial]

They all look pretty darn nice, but personally I like the numbers and the sweet idealscope on the second one!

 

[belle]

Date: 7/25/2006 5:32:25 PM
Author:gbone

Trying to find a stone for an engagement ring and have these candidates so far. Two of them (#''s 2 & 3) are H&A stones, but not sure how much of a difference that makes in performance. Any advice/guidance would be greatly appreciated.

actually, the first one is h&a also. it is not for certain that the last one is since it is a virtual stone (as indicated by the ''contact us for availablity'' notation on the listing)

1&2 both look great.

 

[hoorray]

Due to the size difference at almost the same price as #2, I like #1. There have been many very happy owners of this brand of diamond here over the years. #2 also sounds great, but is smaller in diameter. Since #3 is not in house, it''s hard to know how it would compare, and for the price difference I would pursue the first one before this one.

 

[hausee]

it is gonna be a beautiful stone at that price

 

[gbone]

Thanks for all of the replies. Anything to be concerned about regarding the G color on #1 & #2 vs. F on #3, or the HCA score on #1?

 

[strmrdr]

Diamond #2 has a problem with the IS image.
It appears to be the wrong one for that diamond.
WF has been notified and its being looked into.
Once the proper IS image is up then I can comment on the diamond.

 

[strmrdr]

The right IS image is now there for diamond #2 and its my favorite of the 3.
#1 has slightly better spread but I like the angles of #2 better.

 

[aljdewey]

I also prefer #2.

 

[Rod]

Date: 7/26/2006 5:50:10 AM
Author: gbone
Thanks for all of the replies. Anything to be concerned about regarding the G color on #1 & #2 vs. F on #3, or the HCA score on #1?

Unless you are EXTRAORDINARILY color sensitive, you won''t find a discernable difference between a well cut diamond that is G vs a well cut diamond that is F. G is virtually colorless.