Please help!: Choice of 3 Diamonds...

[al48]

Hi all,

I am close to making a diamond purchase and am hoping for some guidance. I have narrowed the selections down to 3 relatively similar diamonds. All are round brilliant stones, F-VS2, roughly 2.6 carats in weight. I know I’m largely splitting hairs at this point, but since this is a material purchase for me, I’d appreciate any advice to sway me one way or the other. I’ve provided all the info available below. Any suggestions, including insights on potential differences in cut, would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Diamond #1
Weight: 2.62 Ct.
Price: $35,600
Measurements: 8.75-8.81-5.44
Color/Clarity: F, VS2
Flourescence: Faint
GIA Polish, Symmetry: Excellent, Excellent
Depth (GIA): 62.0%
Table (GIA): 57%
Girdle: medium to slightly thick, faceted
Culet: none
Comments on GIA report: "Additonal clouds not shown"
Inclusions (my assessment): one feather (near circumference of diamond from top view), coverable by prong; tiny pinpoints on table, very difficult to see at all under 10x loupe
Sarin reading
Cut score: 0 overall
Crown angle: 35.1 degrees
Pavillion angle: 40.6 degrees
Table: 57%
Culet: 0
Girdle: 2.6%, medium

Diamond#2:
Weight: 2.65 Ct.
Price: $33,800
Measurements: 8.82-8.84-5.53
Color/Clarity: F, VS2
Flourescence: None
GIA Polish, Symmetry: Excellent, Very Good
Depth (GIA): 62.9%
Table (GIA): 56%
Girdle: medium to slightly thick, faceted
Culet: very small
Inclusions: one feather (near circumference of diamond from top view), coverable by prong
Sarin reading
Cut score: 0 overall
Depth: 5.53mm, 62.6% (note this conflicts with GIA report)
Crown angle: 34.7 degrees (15.2%)
Pavillion angle: 41.2 degrees (43.5%)
Table: 55.9% (4.94mm)
Culet: 0.8%, very small
Girdle: 1.8% 1.5% - medium | 1.9% - slightly thick

Diamond#3:
Weight: 2.65 Ct.
Price: $34,200
Measurements: 8.81-8.82-5.51
Color/Clarity: F, VS2
Flourescence: Faint
GIA Polish, Symmetry: Very Good, Very Good
Depth (GIA): 62.3%
Table (GIA): 57%
Girdle: medium
Culet: none
Inclusions: medium-sized pinpoint on side of table
Sarin reading: Not available

 

[niceice]

None of the above, they''re too deep.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/23/2005 4

0:59 PM
Author: niceice
None of the above, they''re too deep.

yep
When you get over 2ct these days your paying a huge premium for the ct weigh per ct you dont want the weight where its not doing you any good for no good reason.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

ayer i agree with Nice Ice.

You could have a look at this one which is 2.5cts but is the same diameter of 8.8mm as the 3 you have put up. And save $10k!

 

[Regular Guy]

Though I might be naive to argue against my (very) learned friends here who have already posted, I'd say #1 is encouraging, based on HCA alone (1.1, TIC, ex,ex,ex, vg), and worth confirming with another non-virtual/predictive system.

(edited to add) P.S.

- I see no comparable options on the search by cut set of diamonds here
- For those on the broker board here, none are a $1 less than $35K
- AGA 1A cuts accept depths to 62.3 (though, if you're counting across the board, other factors like crown angle knock it slightly out of 1A)
- Garry suggests girdle depth won't hurt appearance, though you may pay a bit for it.
- I really like the qualities you've centered on of F & VS2; The Lord's option is an I; maybe fine, but quite a bit different

I'd look further at this one. Option 2 scores not so well on HCA, and you don't really know enough about #3.

Very best wishes!

 

[Lord Summerisle]

certainly an I is different to and F... but is that differance worth $10k? especially when altho that $10k buys a heavier rock.. it isnt any larger in size when seen from above -IE in a ring.

Its an alternative presented as such. to compare and contrast. It has been talked that many when viewing diamonds... without being told which is which pick out a lower colour graded diamond - as they are drawn by the warmer look - while at the same time... they can face up very very white... as many have attested on here.

 

[Regular Guy]

Al, Lord,

Lord particularly...perhaps all things are relative. Al's choice can be looked on its own terms, and with respect to the "current market values" of diamonds with those qualities of carat weight, color and clarity, and judged on that basis, which is what I was doing, and at least part of what I think you were doing in your first comment to Al.

Regarding the value of F vs. I, in part, that may be relative (and, given truth in disclosure, my own e-diamond clocked in at just under 10% of what we're talking about, thank you very much, albeit with qualities of G & VS2).

Alternately, maybe relative only counts....relatively.