Please help us choose between 3.01FSI2, 2.68FVS2, 3.06GSI1

[bem3231]

Hi everyone -

Well, we are ready to make a purchase, and would love some advice / feedback on what we are considering. The first is an Eighternity 3.01 FSI2. We are comparing that to an ideal-cut round brilliant 2.68 FVS2, and an ideal-cut round brilliant 3.06 GSI1. The Eighternity and the FVS2 are the same price, while the 3.06 GSI1 is about 10% more. I liked the Eighternity cut, but am certainly not dead set on it. My main priorities are cut and color.

Any feedback or advice that could help us navigate this decision would be most appreciated!!


STONE #1

The Eighternity...

3.01, F SI2
Polish: GIA VG
Symmetry: GIA VG
Proportions: VG
Crown Angle: 34.9
Crown Height: 14.5%
Pavillion Angle: 41.2
Pavillion Depth: 43.6%
Culet: 0.2%
Table: 56.3%
Total Depth: 61.5%
Girdle Thickness: 2.9 - 4.1%
Star/Upper: 33.9:66.1%
Fluorescence: strong blue

I have seen this stone in person. Although it is an SI2, it is a pretty good one. There are clouds, crystals, feathers, needles, and something listed as "indentation natural", but nothing is under the crown. There is only one inclusion that I can see with my naked eye if I''m looking for it, and it could easily be covered by a prong. I saw it in a variety of lighting conditions, and did not notice any effects of the fluorescence, but when I saw it in diffuse daylight it was through a window. I have seen a Gemex report for it (white light: high, colored light: high, scintillation: very high), and a Firetrace report (Ideal in brilliance and fire, excellent in scintillation).

It is a very pretty stone, but when I plug it into the HCA I get the following:
HCA score: 3.4 (very good)
Light return: very good
fire: good
scintillation: good
spread: very good

It falls within the GIA Excellent cut perameters, but not within the AGS Ideal cut perameters.


I am currently comparing that to the following:

STONE #2

2.68 F VS2
Polish: GIA Excellent
Symmetry: GIA Excellent
Depth: 61.2
Table: 56
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavillion Angle: 40.8
Culet: none
Girdle: medium faceted
Fluorescence: faint

I have not seen this stone in person, but it appears to be an excellent performer. When I plug it into the HCA I get the following:

HCA score: 1.2 (excellent
Light return: excellent
fire: excellent
scintillation: excellent
spread: very good

This stone falls right in the middle of the AGS Ideal and the GIA Excellent ranges.


STONE #3

This stone is about 10% more expensive than the first two.

3.06 G SI1
AGS Ideal 0
Polish: AGS Ideal
Symmetry: AGS Ideal
Depth: 61.4
Table 57
Crown: 14.7%
Pavillion: 43.3%
Culet: 0.2%
Fluorescence: none
Girdle: thin to medium faceted

I have not seen this stone in person either. From it''s inclusion map it appears to be a pretty good SI1 - a feather, and indented natural and some pinpoints, but nothing much and nothing under the table. When I plug it into the HCA the results are:

HCA score: 1.6 (excellent)
Light return: excellent
Fire: very good
scintillation: very good
spread: very good

It falls within both the GIA Excellent and the AGS Ideal cut ranges.

 

[chrono]

Are these all from the same vendor? If all three are from GOG, I'd have Jon line all 3 stones up side by side and capture it in his video to show you how they perform under various lighting.

You are spending a lot of money on a diamond, so I would NOT choose any sight unseen. Ask the vendor(s) for:
1. A Sarin
2. An idealscope picture to check for light leakage
3. An ASETto check for light performance
4. A magnified picture of the stone to see the inclusions for yourself.

It appears that you have narrowed down your choices as far as you can with the HCA. The HCA just weeds out the not so good stones but doesn't tell you which one is better than the other. You also cannot tell if a diamond is eye clean or not by the inclusion map on the cert. Ask the vendor if it is eye clean and also his definition of eye cleanliness.

 

[milton333]

I''d vote #2, based on my personal quirkiness about clarity. But definitely try to get more information before making this big a purchase.

 

[Sparkalicious]

#2 has my vote.

It''s a good performer, as you stated & the F/VS2 combo is a great one!

 

[risingsun]

I agree that you need to see IS images, but based upon the descriptions, I would choose #2. An F VS2 sounds

Number 3 could be OK, but you would need to determine if it meets your standards for being eye clean. It's an AGS 0, which is a plus, but I would want to "take a look under the hood." KWIM?

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

I know you aren''t looking at this color, but I thought I''d throw it out there nonetheless......

http://com.pricescope.com/photos/wink_jones/picture2541.aspx

cheers--Sharon