The magic 1 number

[BubbleGumPlant]

Hey PSers,

A lot of you out there claim that carat size doesn't matter to you, that you just want a well cut diamond. But say your partner has $$$$ to spend, is thinking of getting you a 1 carat diamond, but decides to get you a diamond that is just under the 1 carat mark, or better yet, a 0.89 carat diamond just because the $/carat value is that much better... would you consider your partner cheap even if you couldn't tell the difference between your diamond and a 1 carat diamond? (cuz I can't)

Now before everyone starts calling me cheap , I ask this because at first I was considering getting a 1.2 carat, but then I realized that my eye is not that sharp and I had trouble telling the difference with a 1 carat once the diamond was set. But If I were to buy a 1 carat diamond instead, why wouldn't I just settle for just a tad smaller and a lot cheaper? How do people draw the line when considering carat size? Is that magic 1 number as significant as most people make it out to be?

(At no point am I considering compromising cut and I already know exactly what color and clarity I want, this is strictly a carat question)

 

[yssie]

I can definitely see the difference between a well-cut 0.9 and a 1 (~0.2mm diff in well cut stones), the diff btwn a 0.9 and a 1.2ct (0.6-0.7mm) is obvious and startling.

 

[JulieN]

I think .89 to 1.2 ish is too big of a jump in price and size, possibly 50% price difference or more depending on what color/clarity grades you are looking at. So, yes, I would call you cheap.

Can't put a price on love, though, right?

 

[slg47]

I would look at your budget and get the largest stone for your budget while staying in comfortable clarity/color ranges and not compromising cut. To me a 1.2 is visibly different in size from a 0.89 ct.

ETA and you would save by going under the 0.9 mark, the 0.75 mark, the 0.5 mark...you just have to pick a size eventually or you will be stuck with a 0.01 ct diamond!

 

[boredstiff]

I think .89 to 1.2 ish is too big of a jump in price and size, possibly 50% price difference or more depending on what color/clarity grades you are looking at. So, yes, I would call you cheap.

Can't put a price on love, though, right?

Diamonds != Love

While you can't put a price on love, you can definitely put a price on diamonds. I would say OP should spend whatever amount he feels comfortable spending and whatever that number might be is the right amount. No one has a right to expect more than that. Going from 1 ct to 0.89 carats is not significant. I will concede, however, that going from 1.2 carats to 0.89 carats is probably noticeable (but that clearly wasn't the comparison you were asking about).

 

[Imdanny]

Prices jump at set ct weights, as you mentioned. I don't think you're cheap for considering something that's under one of these set price jumps.

On the other hand, 1.2 (to 1.0) to .89 seems like a drastic drop in size, at least a perceptible one.

 

[Smoothie]

I can definitely see the difference between a well-cut 0.9 and a 1 (~0.2mm diff in well cut stones), the diff btwn a 0.9 and a 1.2ct (0.6-0.7mm) is obvious and startling.

Would this be side by side, or seeing each one at a time? I'm looking at a 1ct vs. a 1.1ct, and the size difference in diameter is .1mm, would you be able to tell the difference in these two stones? Assuming all else is equal?

 

[clgwli]

Do you live in an area where large engagement rings are common? Because PS really has a way of messing with the mind when it comes to size issues. A 1 carat in most circles would be considered very substantial. Out of my friends I have one of the largest stones. Most are probably about 1/2 carat (some larger and some smaller). I'm not trying to brag about a stone size of mine vs. others, but you shouldn't ever feel bad about going for a .89 stone. That is not a small stone by any means!

 

[yssie]

I can definitely see the difference between a well-cut 0.9 and a 1 (~0.2mm diff in well cut stones), the diff btwn a 0.9 and a 1.2ct (0.6-0.7mm) is obvious and startling.

Would this be side by side, or seeing each one at a time? I'm looking at a 1ct vs. a 1.1ct, and the size difference in diameter is .1mm, would you be able to tell the difference in these two stones? Assuming all else is equal?

Side by side, though the size difference btwn 6.4/6.9mm would be obvious even after setting, even with only one in hand at any given time. 1ct should be 6.4-6.5mm, 1.1 6.7ish maybe a hair under, so also visible

0.1mm difference is pushing it beyond my eyesight


A lot does depend on your visual acuity and sensitivity to size, but one thing to keep in mind is that familiarity heightens this sensitivity - even if she doesn't notice the size difference right away, she'll be wearing this diamond every day for years.. a few months from now she'll likely be much more perceptive of even these small size variations

 

[Circe]

I think buying shy of the "magic numbers" makes you smart. I think jumping .30 points just for the savings would make you cheap, though (all other factors being equal). If this is all about how things "look," why not keep looking in 1.2 territory, and drop the color or the clarity? Those tend to be a lot harder to see than half a mm ....

 

[Smoothie]

I bought a 'wider' 1ct at 6.595mm, so I hope it looks a little larger than the 1ct weight would suggest. Its an ideal cut with an HCA of .6.

 

[Todd Gray]

Do you live in an area where large engagement rings are common? Because PS really has a way of messing with the mind when it comes to size issues. A 1 carat in most circles would be considered very substantial. Out of my friends I have one of the largest stones. Most are probably about 1/2 carat (some larger and some smaller). I'm not trying to brag about a stone size of mine vs. others, but you shouldn't ever feel bad about going for a .89 stone. That is not a small stone by any means!

I love this realization "PS really has a way of messing with the mind when it comes to size issues" because it is a statement which is truly insightful. As I recall, in the real world, the industry estimates that fewer than 30% of women in the industrialized nations will ever own a diamond weighing 1.00 carats and larger... But here on PS, the number of people purchasing larger diamonds is definitely higher than that estimate and the cut quality and subsequent visual performance of the diamonds being purchased by PS members is also significantly better than the diamonds being purchased by average consumers.

Nobody can tell you how much money to spend or what carat weight is right for you and your relationship, but you should definitely consider how the diamond purchased will measure up to both of your expectations. Many retail jewelers will tell you that you're supposed to spend two months salary on an engagement ring, I've even heard some jewelers tell their customers that they should spend three months salary (!) and the concept behind that "suggestion" is that "birds of a feather flock together" and if you hang out with your co-workers and their significant others and you all spend essentially the same amount on an engagement ring that your social lives will be balanced and all will be harmonious. Personally, I think the company line is a load of, uh, oh, fertilizer for a bubble gum plant

People should carefully consider their own financial situation and determine what is important to "them" and select a diamond appropriately.

 

[missydebby]

When I was looking for my ring, I was looking for around a carat and was willing to go down to .90 if I found something extraordinary that would justify that. Specifically.... I'm a little bit of a nerd for D/IF even though I know it's overkill. Just the idea of that is awesome to me. I sourced my diamond through Perry at Leon Mege and I had the option of choosing between a .91 D/IF chunky cushion and a 1.01 E/VS2 chunky cushion. I would have jumped on the D/IF, but it just wasn't as beautiful as the E... it was a just a little bow-tie-ish and the E had a gorgeous outline and spectacular faceting. Now, had the D had the look of the E, I wouldv'e done it in a heartbeat.

All that being said, I am totally excited about really having 1 carat. That number is sorta fricken awesome to my non-rational lizard brain.

 

[slg47]

missydebby I also for some reason am excited about getting over the 1 ct mark (why? is it rational? no...)

ETA lizard brain??!?!?

 

[ms.halo]

I'm a "size matters" kind of girl (and in my group of friends I'm one of the few who has less than 2 cts, so it really depends on where you live), so if I was your girlfriend/fiance/wife and I KNEW that you had done this, I would think you were cheap. So if she's a "size matters" person, you ought to consider going back to the 1 ct. mark. You don't want her to be disappointed from the get-go.

 

[missydebby]

missydebby I also for some reason am excited about getting over the 1 ct mark (why? is it rational? no...)

ETA lizard brain??!?!?

hahahaha... lizard brain is my way of saying the deep dark recesses of my gray matter that are all about my animal instinct. I mean, except for an extraordinary case (like the D/IF) i'd pay more to have a 1 carat over a .98 or even a .99. Super not rational... but something deep down inside would be more satisfied...

 

[slg47]

hehehe @missydebby's lizard brain!

 

[cara]

What are *her* priorities on the diamond? Does she like larger ones? If so, then yes you are being cheap to downgrade size, a characteristic she would like, just to save money given the way you have framed it here. Unless your girlfriend likes big diamonds on other people, but is even cheaper than you in terms of her preferences on how you spend money on her and things she wears. You *could* afford a 1.2 ct, were planning to do so, and then decided to downsize just to save money. While any one tenth of a carat size reduction might not be readily apparent on its own, the jump from 1.2 to 0.9 seems noticeable to someone tuned into such things.

IF she likes larger diamonds, ie. she didn't say 0.9 ct is the perfect size for my hand - not too big or too small!!! or I wouldn't want to wear anything bigger than a 1.0 ct - so gaudy! then I would set your budget, decide what color/clarity you are comfortable with and get as big as you can for that size. If you end up just around a magic number in terms of size, there is nothing wrong with, say, shooting for a 1.45 vs. a 1.5 as that is a subtle difference with substantial $$ savings. But 1.45s are fairly rare. And I think that even 1.2 is bigger enough than, say, a 0.95 that you should aim for 1.2 if it is comfortably in budget and within your gf's desired size range. JMO.

 

[MidwestDiamondHunter]

Yes. You'd be cheap. Get a least a 1ct if you have the cash. It's a life long gift, it's worth it.

 

[jaybx09]

honestly, i think it depends...
if you were already way over budget with the 1.2 or the 1 ct and you really technically shouldnt be spending that kind of money and you then realized, hey, i could get something just as nice that is actually in my price range, only thing is it will be smaller, then no..i dont think your being cheap..i think you are being realistic in y our spending...but if all along you planned on the 1.2 ct and knew how much you would be spending and could afford it and were fine with it, and now you want to drop the ct weight way down just because you see how much less you "could' spend..then yes..maybe a little cheap-ish...but do what your wallet lets you do..this is a big expense..yes you want to get the best you can..but you dont want to pay it off for the next 2 years either.....
i think you should stick to original plan....if you are pushing it with budge ton the 1.2 ct..maybe go down to 1 ct....try and keep it at or over the 1 ct (if you can truly afford it with no problems)...
i dont know if this helps at all..lol..
good luck

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think buying shy of the "magic numbers" makes you smart. I think jumping .30 points just for the savings would make you cheap, though (all other factors being equal). If this is all about how things "look," why not keep looking in 1.2 territory, and drop the color or the clarity? Those tend to be a lot harder to see than half a mm ....

Exactly.

And I had a .80 for my first diamond and a 1.16 for my second and there is a HUGE visual difference (see the left and middle photos below).

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'm a "size matters" kind of girl (and in my group of friends I'm one of the few who has less than 2 cts, so it really depends on where you live), so if I was your girlfriend/fiance/wife and I KNEW that you had done this, I would think you were cheap. So if she's a "size matters" person, you ought to consider going back to the 1 ct. mark. You don't want her to be disappointed from the get-go.

are we talking about diamonds??

 

[Dancing Fire]

Yes. You'd be cheap. Get a least a 1ct if you have the cash. It's a life long gift, it's worth it.

so if i buy my GF a < 1ct diamond then i'am being a cheapo?

 

[BubbleGumPlant]

I love all the responses! I purposely pointed out if $$$$ were not an issue just to get people's reactions. Truth is, I am not one of those fortunate ones with $$$$ to spend. After this purchase, money will be quite tight for a while. But like many have pointed out, this is a lifetime type decision and I need to think about this from all angles. So here is where I am at:

option 1: 1.2 J SI1 - go broke, eat ramen noodles for a month and know that I bought the absolute best of my abilities for my loved one

option 2: 1.0 I-J VS2-SI1 - be manageably poor, but achieve "mind cleanliness"'

option 3: 0.87-0.89 I-J VS2-SI1 - Have a little savings account that hopefully will grow so I can actually get married (isn't that the whole point??) but feel like I cheaped out because I technically could have bought better.

I am exaggerating but you get the picture. At least now I know that all you ladies are liars when you say that SIZE DOESN"T MATTER!!!!!!

 

[boredstiff]

At least now I know that all you ladies are liars when you say that SIZE DOESN"T MATTER!!!!!!

Seriously. If the tradition was that women had to buy men engagement rings, I bet they would totally change their tune!!!

Maybe we'd get actual rocks because they're sooo rugged.

 

[slg47]

OK so now that we know the situation...I would go for option 3. I would not be comfortable if I knew my BF spent ALL of his savings acct on a ring. Initially I thought you were looking at a 1.2 ct and then wanted to save money, but now it seems that your budget really allows for a 0.9 ct, so I would go for what your budget allows.

 

[BubbleGumPlant]

Yeah that would be the smart thing to do but I don't think I'll be able to pull the plug on the smaller carat. It's unfortunate that I care too much about what other people think and there's the ridiculous convenience of saying it is a 1 carat.

 

[slg47]

well...I wouldn't worry too much about what other people think. What is your budget, we can help you find a really great stone in your budget (maybe you can get to the 1-ct mark if you look for an eye-clean SI1/SI2?)

 

[BubbleGumPlant]

Yes. You'd be cheap. Get a least a 1ct if you have the cash. It's a life long gift, it's worth it.

I would agree but there are always trade-up policies.

 

[slg47]

it depends, would you be OK with your GF trading up? you will pay more upfront for a vendor with really great upgrade policies...if upgrading is a consideration I would do that. I don't think there is anything wrong with getting <1 ct...MUCH better than not having any savings IMO.