Should I pull the trigger on this one?

[chris9]

Hey all,
Awesome resource! I had used the HCA previously - not knowing that this awesome forum was available. I wanted to get the groups thoughts on the following:
Depth % 61.9
Table % 56.6
Crown Angle 34.8
Star 53.0
Pavilion Angle 40.9
Crown % 15.1
Lower Girdle % 77.0

Not too sure about the depth. I've also used up all my HCA attempts (like 4 months ago when I started searching).

I have the Idealscope and Aset but I'm still learning how to read that...

Thanks!

 

[lovedogs]

Please post the aset and is images

 

[chris9]

Gladly!

 

[lovedogs]

Looks really good. Is it a WF ACA? If so, they are outstanding and you don't need to worry abojtvthe HCA.

 

[chris9]

Looks really good. Is it a WF ACA? If so, they are outstanding and you don't need to worry abojtvthe HCA.

Yes it is! Thanks for taking the time to look, and confirm. I've always looked at ACA but had seen a couple that didn't quite hit all the boxes on the HCA but wanted to make sure. Can never be too careful with a purchase this big...

 

[tyty333]

All of WF's images (H&A, Aset, Idealscope) along with their AGS000 Ideal rating outranks HCA. HCA is a pass or fail tool that takes
4 numbers into account. Images show (good images) exactly what is going on with that particular stone. Be curious to see what ACA
stone didnt "hit all the boxes on the HCA".

 

[kmoro]

Really the HCA is an elimination tool for GIA stones. You don’t need it for AGS because they have the light performance evaluated more accurately already. Nothing replaces real life performance.

 

[gm89uk]

Yes it is! Thanks for taking the time to look, and confirm. I've always looked at ACA but had seen a couple that didn't quite hit all the boxes on the HCA but wanted to make sure. Can never be too careful with a purchase this big...

If you are referring to spread not being excellent in HCA, that is a non-issue and very common for ER stones.

 

[lovedogs]

All of WF's images (H&A, Aset, Idealscope) along with their AGS000 Ideal rating outranks HCA. HCA is a pass or fail tool that takes
4 numbers into account. Images show (good images) exactly what is going on with that particular stone. Be curious to see what ACA
stone didnt "hit all the boxes on the HCA".

This.

 

[sledge]

You're fine on the depth. Generally you want to be 62.4 or less, with a preference for 62 or less. Here you are sitting at 61.9.

As others already noted, the HCA is an elimination tool based on approximations that is based on averaged values (data from certs). When you have things like an AGS cert that uses a 3D scan to determine exact angles, light performance, etc that supersedes the HCA. Additionally, WF provides ASET, idealscope and H&A images to confirm light performance & symmetry.

Regardless, it scores a 1.8 as evidenced below.



I'm guessing it's getting very good marks because of the 34.8/40.9 angle combo. Effectively a 35/41 combo in GIA world, which is pairing a steep crown with a steep pavilion. Normally you want an inverse relationship -- 34/41, or 35/40.6. But because of the precision faceting, super ideal stones get away with breaking "general" rules.

If the stone fits all your other criteria I see no reason not to pull the trigger.

 

[Dancing Fire]

A very nice well balanced stone!

 

[whitewave]

Lovely choice

 

[chris9]

Wow! Somehow I stopped getting email replies on this thread - thanks everybody for the input. Unfortunately I got in contact with WF as soon as I could on Monday from work, and the stone was gone. I'm not as thrilled with the replacement option, and wanted to get your thoughts. It's a more expensive stone, so I'm having a hard time feeling like I'm settling. They're asking $12.5k which is frustrating when comparing to "Ideal" from Blue Nile for ~4k less.

The specs are below. It's also ACA, but I'm worried about the (not sure how to call it) asymmetry of the dark areas of the IS image.

Thanks again for all the feedback - i need to check my subscription settings!

Depth % 61.8
Table % 56.5
Crown Angle 34.7
Star 51.0
Pavilion Angle 40.8
Crown % 15.1
Lower Girdle % 77.0

 

[kmoro]

Wow! Somehow I stopped getting email replies on this thread - thanks everybody for the input. Unfortunately I got in contact with WF as soon as I could on Monday from work, and the stone was gone. I'm not as thrilled with the replacement option, and wanted to get your thoughts. It's a more expensive stone, so I'm having a hard time feeling like I'm settling. They're asking $12.5k which is frustrating when comparing to "Ideal" from Blue Nile for ~4k less.

The specs are below. It's also ACA, but I'm worried about the (not sure how to call it) asymmetry of the dark areas of the IS image.

Thanks again for all the feedback - i need to check my subscription settings!

Depth % 61.8
Table % 56.5
Crown Angle 34.7
Star 51.0
Pavilion Angle 40.8
Crown % 15.1
Lower Girdle % 77.0

Maybe an expert can chime in on this ... but personally, I would not be concerned about that at all. It could be the stone is not facing completely flat. The light return is there.

I think it looks great!!

 

[lovedogs]

Wow! Somehow I stopped getting email replies on this thread - thanks everybody for the input. Unfortunately I got in contact with WF as soon as I could on Monday from work, and the stone was gone. I'm not as thrilled with the replacement option, and wanted to get your thoughts. It's a more expensive stone, so I'm having a hard time feeling like I'm settling. They're asking $12.5k which is frustrating when comparing to "Ideal" from Blue Nile for ~4k less.

The specs are below. It's also ACA, but I'm worried about the (not sure how to call it) asymmetry of the dark areas of the IS image.

Thanks again for all the feedback - i need to check my subscription settings!

Depth % 61.8
Table % 56.5
Crown Angle 34.7
Star 51.0
Pavilion Angle 40.8
Crown % 15.1
Lower Girdle % 77.0

I wouldn't worry about that at all! It looks like a lovely stone.