Please help with these 2 H&A''s

[newbie09]

I posted here recently to get everyone''s opinion on 3 H&A''s on WF (Thanks for the feedback). I have now narrowed it down to the 2.4 ct I VS2 ACA on WF vs a 2.01 F VS2(link:
http://www.idjewelryonline.com/diamond_details1.php?id=18444836&shape=&pricefrom=1&priceto=500000&ca)

I''d like everyone''s honest opinion. I know the difference in size is significant, but the color is much better and the Scintillation, according to the pricescope cut advisor tool, seems to be excellent. Please let me know your thoughts. My goal is to get a great overall diamond that is 2ct of greater within a 25-30k budget.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/25/2008 3:36:26 AM
Author:newbie09
I posted here recently to get everyone's opinion on 3 H&A's on WF (Thanks for the feedback). I have now narrowed it down to the 2.4 ct I VS2 ACA on WF vs a 2.01 F VS2(link:
http://www.idjewelryonline.com/diamond_details1.php?id=18444836&shape=&pricefrom=1&priceto=500000&ca)

I'd like everyone's honest opinion. I know the difference in size is significant, but the color is much better and the Scintillation, according to the pricescope cut advisor tool, seems to be excellent. Please let me know your thoughts. My goal is to get a great overall diamond that is 2ct of greater within a 25-30k budget.

Thanks in advance!

Welcome!

Personally I would rather go with the WF ACA at a glance, do you have the link? If you want an undisputed h&a diamond then the ACA is the one to go for, plus WF have a solid upgrade policy should that ever be a consideration.

The other diamond falls into fiery ideal cut range which some seek out, this basically means the proportions can lend themselves to a display of extra fire if the lighting is right, and it has some extra depth which you often find with such stones, so it could be a lovely type of diamond which some adore. However we have no way of knowing if it is a h&a as we have no images such as a hearts image which is crucial, or an arrow pattern....Also we don't know what criteria this vendor bases their ' h&a' diamonds on, so if you want this cutting style, then ask them for a hearts image, an arrows image and any other info they might have such as ASET.

 

[EricaR]

Date: 12/25/2008 3:48:28 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 12/25/2008 3:36:26 AM
Author:newbie09
I posted here recently to get everyone''s opinion on 3 H&A''s on WF (Thanks for the feedback). I have now narrowed it down to the 2.4 ct I VS2 ACA on WF vs a 2.01 F VS2(link:
http://www.idjewelryonline.com/diamond_details1.php?id=18444836&shape=&pricefrom=1&priceto=500000&ca)

I''d like everyone''s honest opinion. I know the difference in size is significant, but the color is much better and the Scintillation, according to the pricescope cut advisor tool, seems to be excellent. Please let me know your thoughts. My goal is to get a great overall diamond that is 2ct of greater within a 25-30k budget.

Thanks in advance!

Welcome!

Personally I would rather go with the WF ACA at a glance, do you have the link? If you want an undisputed h&a diamond then the ACA is the one to go for, plus WF have a solid upgrade policy should that ever be a consideration.

The other diamond falls into fiery ideal cut range which some seek out, this basically means the proportions can lend themselves to a display of extra fire if the lighting is right, and it has some extra depth which you often find with such stones, so it could be a lovely type of diamond which some adore. However we have no way of knowing if it is a h&a as we have no images such as a hearts image which is crucial, or an arrow pattern....Also we don''t know what criteria this vendor bases their '' h&a'' diamonds on, so if you want this cutting style, then ask them for a hearts image, an arrows image and any other info they might have such as ASET.

Gotta say "ditto" to every single thing Lorelei said. Going with the ACA from WF means you are assured a good stone. I''m not familiar with the other vendor and it didn''t have an IdealScope image (unless I missed it?). I''d need to see an IS before making any kind of decision on that stone.

 

[Lorelei]

HAPPY HOLIDAYS ERICA!!

 

[EricaR]

Same to you Lorelei!

 

[honey22]

Ditto the lovely Lorelei - I would go for the ACA.

 

[Ellen]

It''s not really fair to compare these two stones, as they are apples and oranges. Two different type cuts, with different results.

I would pick the ACA for an engagement ring. And if you want to compare that with a similar stone of higher color, look at the ACA G SI1 you posted in your other thread. If you are wanting higher color, I''d go for that one, if eyeclean. The size difference, especially when set, is not huge.

 

[newbie09]

Thanks all for the response. With your help i''ve narroewed my choice down to the following 2 http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/Compare_Diamonds.aspx?idnos=906725,1466924

Please let me know your opinion. Thanks gain. Happy Holidays!

 

[wishinpink]

I''d go for the larger and cheaper one.. But I don''t really know too much, so maybe someone else can help you

 

[honey22]

Either stone is going to be gorgeous. But, I prefer the whiter stones, so I would sacrifice that tiny size difference *which I doubt you would notice when set* and go for the G Si1, ONLY if it''s verified to be eyeclean. Check with WF on that point.

Good luck

 

[Ellen]

If eyeclean, I would go for the G. But the I would be pretty as well if the G doesn''t work out.

Just make sure you let them know what you do or don''t want to see. If you don''t want to see anything at any distance/angle, just tell them that, so you are on the same page.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/26/2008 8:51:17 AM
Author: Ellen
If eyeclean, I would go for the G. But the I would be pretty as well if the G doesn''t work out.

Just make sure you let them know what you do or don''t want to see. If you don''t want to see anything at any distance/angle, just tell them that, so you are on the same page.

Ditto the ladies Honey and Ellen!