Thoughts on an engagement ring candidate?

[BD74]

Hello everyone. Long time lurker who got a chance to look at diamonds today - I wanted to run a stone by y''all to see your thoughts.

Round Brilliant
GIA certified

Dimensions: 6.41x3.94x3.72
Size 1.01 ct
Color G
Clarity SI1
Depth 61.4%
Table 58.1%
Crown 35.7 deg
Pavilion 40.5 deg
culet 0.6%
Girdle 2.3% (sl. thick-sl. thick)

It got a 1 on the table - crown, pavilion, culet and girdle scored a 0. The table is a little under, i think because there is a small inclusion there. it''s not visible to the naked eye though (at least, not to my naked eye) at about 2 inches or so. It certainly looked sparkly, even when taken out to natural light, and in the dark corners of the jewelry store.

I looked at it with an idealscope and it looked good. A good amount of evenly distributed red, and the symmetry looked ok I wish i had taken a picture of it to post, but forgot my camera. I know it''s not going to be a AGS 000 or anything, but I''d appreciate hearing people''s thoughts!

Thanks in advance for anyone''s input!

 

[neatfreak]

It looks like it probably is a really nice stone!

 

[Mrs W]

Well, it scorces a 0.9 on the HCA, my thoughts are that the only thing that might put me off by the #s alone would be the table. i would say get idealscope image to see if worth buying

 

[Mrs W]

just saw that you did look with idealscope, sorry....If it looks good and price is right i say go for it

 

[honey22]

Whoa! Hold on a sec - didn''t anyone notice the dimensions?! Is that a typo? If that''s not a typo, then it''s not a Round brilliant?

 

[Mrs W]

HA, your exactly right Honey22.....this is very bad!

SORRY! What shape is this stone man? I guess i just looked at angles and depth and table and assumed it was a RB

 

[honey22]

Maybe I am a duffer

You saw the stone in person right, so you would have noticed if it wasn''t right. Is that the correct certificate/numbers for the stone you looked at?

 

[BD74]

well damn.... maybe i wrote down the wrong numbers - i was a little flustered during the whole process. chalk it up to nerves.

it sure as hell looked like a round stone to me... not drastically different in shape from the other stones I looked at.

I wrote that the daimeter was 6.41mm (6.39-6.94) 0.8%
the total depth was 3.94mm 61.4%
the table was 3.72mm 58.1%


that''s why I wrote 6.41x3.94x3.72 ....

I think I''m missing something....

 

[BD74]

I think I stepped on a terminology issue?
What is the difference between saying you''re looking at a "round" diamond and a "round brilliant" diamond?

 

[Mrs W]

If your talking about 57 facets then you are referring to the RB, but when ppl here say round they usually mean RB. Just out of curitosity What is your budget if you don''t mind me asking, if you could tell us that im sure some ppl here could come up with some really nice options for you!

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 11/29/2008 7:53:47 PM
Author: BD74
well damn.... maybe i wrote down the wrong numbers - i was a little flustered during the whole process. chalk it up to nerves.


it sure as hell looked like a round stone to me... not drastically different in shape from the other stones I looked at.


I wrote that the daimeter was 6.41mm (6.39-6.94) 0.8%

the total depth was 3.94mm 61.4%

the table was 3.72mm 58.1%



that's why I wrote 6.41x3.94x3.72 ....


I think I'm missing something....

Yes, you wrote the dimensions wrong. It should be 6.39x6.94x3.94.

You don't write the table in that. Everything is fine, don't worry.

 

[beach]

Isn''t anthing more than .10 variation considered "out of round" for a round brilliant diamond?

 

[honey22]

Yep, if those are the correct revised numbers, that stone is quite out of round. I would say you can do better.

 

[John P]

What is the GIA report number?

 

[John P]

BD74, it looks like you've turned in for the night. I'm going to speculate the measurements are as follows:

6.39 - 6.44 x 3.94

This would result in a 6.41 avg diameter, depth percentage of 61.4%, and a 3.72mm table would equal 58.1%.

A number of questions and comments: First, this is a GIA graded diamond but your measurements were drawn from a separate scan, such as a Sarin or Ogi. GIA grading reports for rounds since 2006 include measurements and a cut grade. Do you have the GIA numbers? Are they in-line with the scan you were given? If no, is this a pre-2006 report? If that is the case it may be possible to query the online GIA db for the official numbers. If it is an older report you should ask if the diamond was a trade-in from a prior customer. If yes it should be completely checked out by an independent before you decide to purchase it.

Additionally:

culet 0.6%

It got a 1 on the table - crown, pavilion, culet and girdle scored a 0.

The scanner assigned those numbers based on software criteria for the old 1996 AGS proportions system. Since 2005 these provisional scanner grades have been obsolete. The 1 for a 58 table is an outdated notion and a 0.6% culet is actually a medium culet. In the GIA metric m culet will limit the stone to a VG cut grade. So would the pavilion and crown angles you reported, depending on rounding.

It certainly looked sparkly, even when taken out to natural light, and in the dark corners of the jewelry store.

I looked at it with an idealscope and it looked good. A good amount of evenly distributed red, and the symmetry looked ok I wish i had taken a picture of it to post, but forgot my camera. I know it's not going to be a AGS 000 or anything, but I'd appreciate hearing people's thoughts!

Actually it would stand a better chance of earning the top AGS grade than GIA EX, since PA
Very cool that you checked it out with the ideal-scope. The table, crown, pavilion combo is nice. If you had the GIA report numbers you could tell us lower half length as well, which I consider key in this configuration. If it looks great to you it could be worth pursuing. I'd suggest you get some answers first.

 

[BD74]

Thanks so much for your thoughts everyone! I''m going to ask some questions and look more into the stone.

Thanks again. Y''all are a wonderful resource!