should I order this?

[puddles]

Hi All

My girlfriend is on this website all the time and it has helped us a ton in the search for our perfect ring. We found one that we are both interested in, so I thought it was finally my turn to create a login name and post. We have worked really hard to find one that will work and now I just don''t want to fumble on the 2 yard line. I am hoping you all might be able to let me know if I should move forward on this stone. I have 24 hours to make a decision.

Thanks in advance!

Round
1.79
H
SI-2 (eye clean and no dangerous inclusions)
7.81-7.88 x 4.78
Depth 60.8%
Table size 55.6%
crown angle 34.2
crown height 15.1%
pavilion angle 40.5
pavilion depth 42.7%
cutlet .04mm
thin-sl. thick
star/upper ratio 50:50
Lower Girdle Halves: 75%

 

[Ellen]

Hi puddles,

Ideally I''d like to see that crown with a bit deeper pavillion. Is this from an online vendor? And can you get a real pic of it, along with an IS maybe?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If you put those numbers into the HCA, you''ll get a .4, which is not very common for the stones we usually see. The x is on the edge of GIA Excellent and it is not in the AGS0 box. I''d be afraid to do it unless you have seen the stone in various lighting. There are safer numbers for internet ordering.

 

[puddles]

Thanks for your response. This is from WF and they did send a real picture and ideal scope. It looks good to me. You can see some inclusions in the 40X photo, but nothing huge and the ideal scope is really red.

 

[puddles]

Hi Diamond Seeker- thanks for the post

What does it mean that it has a .4- I mean I know the HCA, but I thought anything under 2 was okay. Is there a number that is too low?

Thanks

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If WF likes the stone and recommends it, then I would feel okay about it. Most of the time we see warnings not to go below about 40.6 on the pavilion angle. But WF is in a better position to evaluate the stone. I thought maybe you were ordering from one of the drop-ship vendors and no one would really be evaluating the stone for you.

 

[Ellen]

You''ve got a good vendor there, ask to talk to Brian. Have him look at the stone and tell you whether it''s fine, or you could do better.

You have a shallow pavillion with a crown angle that ideally could be higher to balance things out better. Sometimes that will cause some head shadowing, and the diamond may lack a bit of contrast/scintillation. That''s what Brian can tell you, if it will be a problem or not.

 

[puddles]

okay- good to know. It does say 40.5 to 40.9 on that angle. Does that make a difference?
will it make a difference in darkness or light leakage?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 3/3/2008 5:02:57 PM
Author: puddles
okay- good to know. It does say 40.5 to 40.9 on that angle. Does that make a difference?
will it make a difference in darkness or light leakage?

Does it say that on the Sarin report? if so, your PA should be about 40.7, which would definitely be better.

Do you have the grading report? and can you post that, or the Sarin?

 

[puddles]

Good idea- it is scary that GIA would rate it EX if there are so many problems.

 

[puddles]

oops typo 40.3 to 40.9 is what it says.

 

[puddles]

I am trying to figure out how to post it. It might take me a few min.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

GIA EXcellent is a very broad range. That is why you have to be a bit careful since some are better than others.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Actually, though, WF has some in-house stones that I would MUCH rather have:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-676364.htm (5% off ACA''s with wire/PS discount)

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-636608.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-513829.htm

 

[puddles]

thanks for those suggestions. I will take a look at them. I have asked WF a couple questions about the performance and such. If they come back with a positive response, do you think it will be okay. I am just trying to gage- could this be a terrible stone or is it a good stone, but there are better? They did say it had great performance.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 3/3/2008 5:26:58 PM
Author: puddles
thanks for those suggestions. I will take a look at them. I have asked WF a couple questions about the performance and such. If they come back with a positive response, do you think it will be okay. I am just trying to gage- could this be a terrible stone or is it a good stone, but there are better? They did say it had great performance.

That says a lot. Since we don''t know the actual numbers, we can''t really say, but they have the stone and know what to look for. So if it gets a thumbs up from them, you''re good to go!

 

[puddles]

Thanks everyone- there is so much to think about and so many things that go into this. Knowledge is great, but can also be a bit scary! I have a few questions into WF and we''ll see what they come back with.