Please Help Me Choose Between Two Diamonds

[Kiribell]

I have been given the choice of the following two round brilliant diamond engagement rings. For complicated reasons they are my only two choices. Which do you think has the better cut and is bigger necessarily better ? Which would you choose and why? The stats are as follows :

Ring # 1
Weight : 3.240 carats
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS1

Cut Proportions :
Total Depth Percentage: 59.7%
Table Size Percentage: 60%
Crown Height Percentage: 13.5%
Crown Angle: 33.8
Pavilion Depth Percentage: 43.4%
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Symmetry: Excellent
Cut Measurements: 9.64 x 9.66 x 5.76 mm

Ring # 2
Weight: 3.510 carats
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS 1

Cut Proportions:
Total Depth Percentage: 60.1%
Table Size Percentage: 60%
Crown Height Percentage: 13.4%
Crown Angle: 33.8
Pavilion Depth Percentage: 43.6%
Pavilion Angle: 41.1
Symmetry: Excellent
Cut Measurements: 9.86 x 9.89 x 5.94

TIA for your help and advice.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Pictures/video would be helpful. Just know that both are considered 60/60 diamonds. That doesn’t mean they are ‘bad’, but you should do some research on here about what that means and how those diamonds differ from ‘ideal’ cut diamonds in terms of fire, brilliance, etc. BEFORE you buy either of them.

 

[lovedogs]

Pictures/video would be helpful. Just know that both are considered 60/60 diamonds. That doesn’t mean they are ‘bad’, but you should do some research on here about what that means and how those diamonds differ from ‘ideal’ cut diamonds in terms of fire, brilliance, etc. BEFORE you buy either of them.

Exactly. Also, I assume these are GIA or AGS graded, right? Just to check.

 

[lovedogs]

Also, run them through the HCA calculator (assuming they are gia/AGS certified and the #s are accurate).

 

[kmoro]

I have been given the choice of the following two round brilliant diamond engagement rings. For complicated reasons they are my only two choices. Which do you think has the better cut and is bigger necessarily better ? Which would you choose and why? The stats are as follows :

Ring # 1
Weight : 3.240 carats
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS1

Cut Proportions :
Total Depth Percentage: 59.7%
Table Size Percentage: 60%
Crown Height Percentage: 13.5%
Crown Angle: 33.8
Pavilion Depth Percentage: 43.4%
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Symmetry: Excellent
Cut Measurements: 9.64 x 9.66 x 5.76 mm

Ring # 2
Weight: 3.510 carats
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS 1

Cut Proportions:
Total Depth Percentage: 60.1%
Table Size Percentage: 60%
Crown Height Percentage: 13.4%
Crown Angle: 33.8
Pavilion Depth Percentage: 43.6%
Pavilion Angle: 41.1
Symmetry: Excellent
Cut Measurements: 9.86 x 9.89 x 5.94

TIA for your help and advice.

I would go for the first one, and here’s why:
- slightly smaller table at 59.7%
- crown angle is the same as the diamond #2
- pavilion angle is slightly lower at 41. vs 41.1 ... because PA can cause problems as it goes over 41.something and the fact that there are slight variations in angles across every diamond, I would go with the lower PA.
- slightly higher crown

In real life, I’m not sure the differences between these diamonds would be noticeable - these are minuscule differences, even in diamond terms. Many people will tell you they don’t like 60/60 but I’ve seen some that were very beautiful with lots of fire. Maybe they have less fire and more white light return than diamonds with smaller tables, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t have fire, and on the upside you get great spread for the weight. I had one for a little while and was quite surprised at how much fire it produced after reading everything on PS .... however, it did seem to have more of an obstruction issue and/or light leakage under the table as it looked a bit dark in the middle area and I ended up returning it ... but not because it lacked fire, lol. (unfortunately I had no ASET image/scope at the time).

Are you able to view the diamonds in person? If you can view them side-by-side in direct sunlight and compare size and frequency of white and colour flashes, that might help you decide. Can you get some light performance images (ASET scopes are only $25)?

It’s a shame to be limited to those choices in that size, imo. At E VS1 over 3 carats, we’re talking about a really expensive diamond. If it was me, I would find some other options somehow. I know you have your reasons and say you have no other choices, but again, if it was me, I would find a way - even if it cost me a few more dollars ... even a few thousand would be a small percentage of the total cost and would be worth it to get an ideal cut. I can’t imagine making a purchase of that size without light performance images at least. Just my opinion, of course.

 

[lovedogs]

I would go for the first one, and here’s why:
- slightly smaller table at 59.7%
- crown angle is the same as the diamond #2
- pavilion angle is slightly lower at 41. vs 41.1 ... because PA can cause problems as it goes over 41.something and the fact that there are slight variations in angles across every diamond, I would go with the lower PA.
- slightly higher crown

In real life, I’m not sure the differences between these diamonds would be noticeable - these are minuscule differences, even in diamond terms. Many people will tell you they don’t like 60/60 but I’ve seen some that were very beautiful with lots of fire. Maybe they have less fire and more white light return than diamonds with smaller tables, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t have fire, and on the upside you get great spread for the weight. I had one for a little while and was quite surprised at how much fire it produced after reading everything on PS .... however, it did seem to have more of an obstruction issue and/or light leakage under the table as it looked a bit dark in the middle area and I ended up returning it ... but not because it lacked fire, lol. (unfortunately I had no ASET image/scope at the time).

Are you able to view the diamonds in person? If you can view them side-by-side in direct sunlight and compare size and frequency of white and colour flashes, that might help you decide. Can you get some light performance images (ASET scopes are only $25)?

It’s a shame to be limited to those choices in that size, imo. At E VS1 over 3 carats, we’re talking about a really expensive diamond. If it was me, I would find some other options somehow. I know you have your reasons and say you have no other choices, but again, if it was me, I would find a way - even if it cost me a few more dollars ... even a few thousand would be a small percentage of the total cost and would be worth it to get an ideal cut. I can’t imagine making a purchase of that size without light performance images at least. Just my opinion, of course.

Agreed. It's a lot of money to spend for only 2 options. I would also be willing to spend more to expand my options.

 

[Kaycee2018]

I would go for the first one, and here’s why:
- slightly smaller table at 59.7%

Unless I’m misreading, isn’t it the depth percentage that is 59.7 on the first one? Making the table at 60% larger than the depth, which I believe is a big no-no.

I agree... that is a very nice budget to only have two options, neither of which is ideal.

 

[headlight]

Given that I, myself, was the proud owner (NOT!) of a 3.29-ct. RB with the 60-60 "situation"... my advice to you is run (don't walk!) as fast as you can from both of these stones!
PLEASE (I beg of you!) learn from my mistake and do not get either of these.
If my mistakes help even just one person it was worth it

 

[kmoro]

Unless I’m misreading, isn’t it the depth percentage that is 59.7 on the first one? Making the table at 60% larger than the depth, which I believe is a big no-no.

I agree... that is a very nice budget to only have two options, neither of which is ideal.

Oh crap my eyes are broken! Yes it is a big no-no for the most part but .03 isn’t going to matter much ... I would still pick it over a PA of 41.1 ...

 

[bmfang]

I would still choose the one where the pavilion is at 41 degrees. Anything above 41 can cause issues.

This is notwithstanding that the one with a PA of 41.1 appearing to be a 0 on their PGS.