Round 1.62 E VS2 or 1.72 F VS1 - Which would u choose?

[rt1manparty]

Hi Everyone,

this is my first post on pricescope. the information here has been a ton of help for me and i really appreciate all your contributions.

i leveraged the information here to help me in my rock shopping the last 4 months. I've looked at 10-12 comparable stones and narrowed it down to just two. Unfortunately, the stones are at two different dealers so i can't compare them side by side. There is also a 5K price difference between the two. I had hoped for a tighter grouping in price but it is what it is given what is available to me right now through the dealers. Hence, i am leveraging the power of price scope to help me make my final decision I'll post the winner on pricescope as a reference for all in the future.

Stone # 1 - In person this stone looked as big as a 1.7 F VS1 next to it. It also looked a little whiter than the F
What i like about this stone: it is priced right, in line with Blue Nile and Price Scope. Also has an excellent HCA score
My concerns with this stone: I'm getting better color here but am trading it for more inclusions. Iam going back to the store tomorrow to see if i can see the inclusions with my naked eye. is moving to from e to f worth it? could i get a bigger better stone by a spending a little more?
1.62 Ct E VS2
7.48x7.53x4.69
Cut: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Florescence: None
Culet: None
Inclusions: Crystal and Natural on the table but not directly in the center, closer to one side.
table - 55%
Depth - 62.5%
Crown Angle - 34.5
Pavillion Angle - 41
Girdle - Medium faceted

Stone # 2 - In Person this stone looked much better than a 1.7 E VS2 next to it.
What I like about this stone: Inclusions seem minimal with just a few small clouds. it is also harder for me to see the clouds
My concerns with this stone: Stone is priced higher than comps on Blue Nile and Price Scope. Not sure if i am getting a better stone by paying $5K more than the 1.62 E VS2 above.
1.72 Ct F VS1
7.64x7.67x4.75
Cut: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Florescence: None
Culet: None
Inclusions: A few clouds near one corner of the table
table - 58%
Depth - 62.1%
Crown Angle - 35
Pavillion Angle - 41.2
Girdle - Medium-Slightly Thick (faceted)

Which do you think is the best stone and why assuming that you could afford either one.

Thanks in advance for your feedback

 

[stone-cold11]

From the numbers, #1. #2's numbers are a little iffy.

 

[slg47]

when you say the 2nd one looked much better...what do you mean? more sparkly? did you look at them in different lighting?

VS2 shouldn't be a problem, should be eye-clean, but best for you to check with your own eyes

 

[rt1manparty]

Hey sig47 . For the second rock, the jeweler had a 1.7e vs2 available for comparison. It was a different e vs2 than listed above. It would be great if I could compare the two I want side by side but they are through different vendors. I felt that the final two rocks both performed well on person. I did get to see the 1.62 e vs1 in daylight and it looked bright. Will try to maybe do that with the 1.72 f vs1 today

 

[Amys Bling]

Well, first of all what are you comfortable spending? Is spending the 5K extra something you are completely comfortable with- is it within budget. Honestly, I don't think you will see much of a size difference between the two. #1's numbers are better according to StoneCold- I trust his opinion and am sure it's below 2.0 on the HCA if SC said the nunbers were good.

See them in all lighting and make sure they are both eye clean, although VS1 and VS2 should be eye clean stones.

 

[yssie]

what is lgf on #2?

if it's - say, 85 - you have learnt something valuable about what you prefer to see - twinkle, fast scintillation, skinny & unintrusive arrows even in 'prime arrow lighting' and orientation, if you wil

 

[rt1manparty]

Hi Yssie,

Turns out that the LGF on both stones is 75%. Interesting. Does that mean I am prone to like a particular look?

I went back and looked at the 1.72 F VS1 today in the store and tired to see the inclusions with the loupe. It was only when i used a microscope at 35x magnification when I could see three small clouds clustered together near the corner of the table. The jeweler told me that while it is rated VS1 this stone is more like a VVS2. Could be the reason why they priced the rock above the price of an average 1.72 F VS1 on blue nile.

i was able to see quickly the inclusions on the 1.62 E VS2 with the loupe. then again, how often would someone whip out a loupe to check out a stone anyways

thanks for all your feedback! Keep them coming. I'm heading back to my other jeweler tomorrow to look at the 1.62 E VS2 again under a microscope. will report my results

 

[Dreamer_D]

I prefer the numbers of number 1. You are also not really trading for "more includions". VS2 is a very very safe clarity grade unless you like "purity" or like to look at your diamond with a loup. I would save the $5 for sure.

 

[slg47]

I would focus more on what the stones look like in different lighting than under the loupe-you will not be looking at them under the loupe most of the time

 

[Dreamer_D]

Why do you care about how things look under the microscope? I think it is really a useless way to assess a diamond and falls prey to marketing hype about the importance of clarity. Use your eyes without magnification and let that guide you. Oh, and the sales ploy that the VS1 is really more like a VVS2, that does not affect pricing. If it is priced higher than comps it is because the vendor is charging more pure and simple.

 

[yssie]

Hi Yssie,

Turns out that the LGF on both stones is 75%. Interesting. Does that mean I am prone to like a particular look?

I went back and looked at the 1.72 F VS1 today in the store and tired to see the inclusions with the loupe. It was only when i used a microscope at 35x magnification when I could see three small clouds clustered together near the corner of the table. The jeweler told me that while it is rated VS1 this stone is more like a VVS2. Could be the reason why they priced the rock above the price of an average 1.72 F VS1 on blue nile.

i was able to see quickly the inclusions on the 1.62 E VS2 with the loupe. then again, how often would someone whip out a loupe to check out a stone anyways

thanks for all your feedback! Keep them coming. I'm heading back to my other jeweler tomorrow to look at the 1.62 E VS2 again under a microscope. will report my results

the quick and dirty http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/facets-the-lower-halves.htm
This stone vs. This stone

 

[rt1manparty]

Hey Dreamer D,

Thanks for the dose of reality. I definitely don't want to get caught up in the details such as peering at something so microscopic that nobody would ever see/know about it except me.

Turns out that the 1.72 F VS1 is being sold through a good size dealer in the jewelry mart in my city while the 1.62 E VS2 was ordered by a gemologist who works in a local mom and pop shop.

 

[rt1manparty]

Hi Yssie,

Thanks for the LGF info and the comparisons. i guess my eye gravitates towards 75% since i chose two diamonds at two different dealers that had the same LGF. I looked through all the comp diamonds i selected from a most of the others were 80%. It was nice to learn about the difference. Thanks for the input!

 

[rt1manparty]

Snapshot of GIA 1.62 E VS2 Specs/Diagram

 

[rt1manparty]

Snapshopt of GIA 1.72 F VS1 Specs

 

[Dreamer_D]

Yes, I still think that based on this the winner is the E VS2. The angles and proportions are nicer to me -- I like a nice small table and the crown and pavilion are a little "safer combo". And I really do think that you cannot sneeze at a $5k difference in price, especially for a) something you cannot and will never see in real life (assuming the VS2 is totally eye clean to the unaided eye) and b) the F VS1 is overpriced relative to the online comps you saw (= not a good deal in my opinion).

If you go see them again, take them into many different lighting environments like natural lighting, hold it under a table, take it into an office with overhead flourescent lighting etc. See how it looks in all those environments *not* compared to come random diamond they give you as a comparable (because they could easily stack the deck so to speak by giving you a dog) but rather to your eye on its own. Also, you might consider buying one of the diamonds (assuming they have a no questions asked refund policy) and then taking it to compare to the other one t oset your mind at ease (knowing that the store owner will of course criticize the other stone ) or better, have both sent to an independent appraiser to give you an opinion.

BUT I do not think all that is necessary. Based on the specs and what you have said, it is an easy choice for the VS2 in my book. I personally would also opt for G color, but that is neither here nor there