Spltting Hairs - The Poll (I forgot to hit it)

[meeeee]

Wow, it''s getting close and you guys have been so helpful! I am now down to the following three diamonds. I will be buying one of these three. I''m getting images and reports on ''eye-cleanliness'' tomorrow, but am curious about your opinions.

1- http://www.bluenile.com/viewcert.asp?pid=LD00262160&zoom=1


2- http://www.bluenile.com/viewcert.asp?pid=LD00540497&zoom=1


3- http://www.bluenile.com/viewcert.asp?pid=LD00274758&zoom=1

 

[KBerly]

i'd pick the 1.66ct one...looks good, and has the most spread

 

[phoenixgirl]

I agree, a savings of $1k (because the stone wasn't technically "ideal" and the medium flourescence) for a stone that spreads larger and has a 1.0HCA score . . . sign me up for #1

 

[nicknomo]

Tough choice.. I couldn't load the certs for some odd reason.

I would go for the one that you think will have the greatest chance for being eye clean. Since the tables of the other two have inclusions, #1 might be a bit better. Of course without the cert to look at, I'm basing this on an uneducated guess.

If medium blue flourescence doesn't bother you, then by all means #1 is probably a good deal. I'd make sure it's eye clean.

You want to get the best stone in your price range, and you want it to be eye clean... even if this means sacrificing size. Personally I think a visible spec in the dead center detracts from the beauty of the diamond.

 

[Mara]

Funny that the first one is cheapest and only rated 'VG' in cut by BN but it has better specs in my opinion than the other two and is clearly the one to choose!

I like it because it has better crown and pav angles, it has the most spread, its cheaper, it has med blue fluor which I would LOVE to have in an H colored stone, it would be alot of fun...and it has my sweet spot on the HCA at 1.0.




The 1.7's score of 0.6 is too low for me on HCA...it may not have that scint..and I don't love the angles or the Good on Symm; and the 2nd stone is rated a BIC by HCA which I have already had and didn't like better than a TIC, not ID ID on polish/symm, also not ideal angles for me.




Whatever you decide, good luck! Oh and if you don't choose that first one, watch out cuz it's right up MY alley!!

 

[chrono]

I really like the first one for a few reasons:
1. I like the combination of 34.1 and 40.8 angles.
2. Blue fluorescence!
3. Nice spread and HCA
4. Ideal polish & symmetry

I can't believe BN would rate this as a very good cut only. I'd say pick this stone and pocket the savings. Providing that this is eye-clean to you, this is THE one.

 

[fire&ice]

Anyone who knows me knows what I picked.

But, with the caveat that it is fairly eyeclean. I would ask BN about that issue.

Good luck.

 

[hoorray]

#1, after finding out details about the inclusions.

 

[meeeee]

Thanks everyone for your ideas and help! I should be getting some feedback and pics today - which I'll post for all you diamond lovers. Looks like #1 is the winner (it's the one I was leaning towards already - so thanks for the confirmation!).

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/13/2004 8:04:07 AM chrono wrote:

I can't believe BN would rate this as a very good cut only. ----------------

I can, because with a 58% table, it cannot be ideal by AGS0 standards. This is similar to a stone that gets VG on polish or symmetry - no difference to the eye, but it technically isn't an AGS0.

The beautiful thing is....there's NO difference to the eye, and it still looks like the faraway winner to me! Nice price and beautiful stone, it seems!