- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 58,579
Re: The worst customer service and buying experience of my l
I assumed anyone looking at the numbers can see that there are two numbers and it doesn't matter which was listed first by the vendor. I copied and pasted the dimensions. 6.75 x 4.57 is a heck of a lot smaller than 7.80 X 6.72!
distracts|1336106690|3187196 said:diamondseeker2006|1336086637|3186959 said:Okay, the first stone is not very attractive compared to the others linked. But I am glad you did link it because at 1.81 carats, the diameter is 7.16 x 6.57.
The ring I linked for you above has a 1.67 diamond with measurements of 7.80 X 6.72!!!!! A definite larger appearance than the 1.81!!!!
The rest are virtual stones again with no pictures. But.......
1.9 4.57x6.75 !!!
1.91 4.72x7.02 !!!
2.07 7.31x7.07 better than the previous two but about the same surface area as the 1.67
2.02 7.39x7.14 " "
See, you really have to look at the measurements because 2 cts of weight means little when the stone looks like a diamond less than a carat!
DS, the 1.9s have the depth listed first, so they're actually not as small as the measurements you copied suggest.
I would honestly buy the preloved one... I don't know how else you're going to get a diamond that big in your budget with your specs, though many on PS can work magic with finding diamonds.
