Hi there, first post here and just want to say that this forum has helped me out so much! Thanks in advance.
I've employed the service of a Sydney, Australia based diamond seller/jeweller to create a 'custom-made' engagement (platinum) ring. They import diamonds from overseas and manufacture settings locally. We got our diamond (round brilliant, 1.01ct, VS2, F colour, XXX) in and it was great, exactly as stated on the GIA certificate. The next step was to pick a setting design and manufacture it. My GF and I went to Cartier and fell in love with their classic '1895' design with no side stones. We went back to our e-ring company and told them to make a replica of the Cartier 1895 and my GF's finger was measured - it was size I (Aus size).
We then went overseas for about 3 weeks. A week after we came back we went to pick up the ring. My GF tried it on and noticed it wouldn't fit, no matter how hard she tried. They measured the ring size and found out it was actually H (US 3.5) - a full size smaller than what was originally agreed upon. Not only that, the ring width was incredibly thick -2.8mm it was measured. It looks pretty distant from a Cartier 1895 with a 1.0ct stone. Looks ridiculous at 2.8mm thick and with such a tiny diameter...
Now I don't know exactly what the ring width should be for a Cartier 1895 with a stone of 1.0ct (because the width varies based on ring size and stone weight), but it definitely ain't 2.8mm... From what we recall from our Cartier store visit it was about 2.2-2.5mm. Looking at other Cartier 1895 replicas on the net and other similar cathedral-style settings, none of them are that thick! I recall that the consultant said that because my GF has tiny fingers, something 'thin' would be great for her. I don't really consider 2.8mm thin, especially for a ring that small!
I initially agreed to the company taking the ring back and stretching it to size I&1/4 and filing down the ring shank to 2.5mm all round. Got home and did some research and found that doing so may affect the structural integrity of the platinum ring. And I have no idea what the filing down will do to the ring...
Called them today and said I'm going to settle for no less than a new setting. They measured my GF's finger, and knew what setting design we wanted and stuffed up on both accounts. I'm not sure if I'm being unreasonable, but I'm plonking down more than $10,000 on an engagement ring, and I expect a ring that has not been tampered with and modified, especially if it's supposed to be 'custom made'.
The only reason that we went with a local shop and not online was that we are able to have a design that we wanted. It costs more locally and seems to take longer than say Whiteflash, Blue Nile etc.
Still waiting to hear back...
Anyone have any opinions on this? Any feedback would be good.
I've employed the service of a Sydney, Australia based diamond seller/jeweller to create a 'custom-made' engagement (platinum) ring. They import diamonds from overseas and manufacture settings locally. We got our diamond (round brilliant, 1.01ct, VS2, F colour, XXX) in and it was great, exactly as stated on the GIA certificate. The next step was to pick a setting design and manufacture it. My GF and I went to Cartier and fell in love with their classic '1895' design with no side stones. We went back to our e-ring company and told them to make a replica of the Cartier 1895 and my GF's finger was measured - it was size I (Aus size).
We then went overseas for about 3 weeks. A week after we came back we went to pick up the ring. My GF tried it on and noticed it wouldn't fit, no matter how hard she tried. They measured the ring size and found out it was actually H (US 3.5) - a full size smaller than what was originally agreed upon. Not only that, the ring width was incredibly thick -2.8mm it was measured. It looks pretty distant from a Cartier 1895 with a 1.0ct stone. Looks ridiculous at 2.8mm thick and with such a tiny diameter...
Now I don't know exactly what the ring width should be for a Cartier 1895 with a stone of 1.0ct (because the width varies based on ring size and stone weight), but it definitely ain't 2.8mm... From what we recall from our Cartier store visit it was about 2.2-2.5mm. Looking at other Cartier 1895 replicas on the net and other similar cathedral-style settings, none of them are that thick! I recall that the consultant said that because my GF has tiny fingers, something 'thin' would be great for her. I don't really consider 2.8mm thin, especially for a ring that small!
I initially agreed to the company taking the ring back and stretching it to size I&1/4 and filing down the ring shank to 2.5mm all round. Got home and did some research and found that doing so may affect the structural integrity of the platinum ring. And I have no idea what the filing down will do to the ring...
Called them today and said I'm going to settle for no less than a new setting. They measured my GF's finger, and knew what setting design we wanted and stuffed up on both accounts. I'm not sure if I'm being unreasonable, but I'm plonking down more than $10,000 on an engagement ring, and I expect a ring that has not been tampered with and modified, especially if it's supposed to be 'custom made'.
The only reason that we went with a local shop and not online was that we are able to have a design that we wanted. It costs more locally and seems to take longer than say Whiteflash, Blue Nile etc.
Still waiting to hear back...
Anyone have any opinions on this? Any feedback would be good.
300x240.png)