Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Tiffany: 1.36 F & 1.42 F - need your help to decide

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
D

doctorow

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
6
Hi,

I got referred to you guys through the purseblog community. I am about to buy an engagement ring from Tiffany (I now, totally overpriced, but what can I do - it''s my girlfriend''s dream). Those are the diamonds of the two rings (round brilliant, with bead-set band) they offered me (certificate is from Tiffany):

1.42 F VS1
Shape Round
Cut Brilliant
Measures: 7.15-7.19x4.48mm
Fluorescence: None
Precision of cut: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Total depth: 62.5%
Table size: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.5%
Pavilion Depth: 43.1%
Girdle Thickness: Slighty thick
Girdle Finish: Faceted

1.36 F VS1
Shape Round
Cut Brilliant
Measures: 7.09-7.11x4.36mm
Fluorescence: None
Precision of cut: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Total depth: 61.4%
Table size: 59%
Crown Angle: 35.4%
Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
Pavilion Angle: 40.8°
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle Thickness: Medium to Slighty thick
Girdle Finish: Faceted

The 1.42 ring would cost me $25.600 (incl. tax), the 1.36 ring would cost $24.600 (incl. taxes).

I am tending towards the 1.42 carat ring. Do you see anything fundamentally wrong with it (other than the price, I know Tiffany has a markup, but let''s say compared to other Tiffany rings and cut-wise)?

Thanks for your help!
 
welcome to ps doctorow
35.gif


i''m sure your gf is going to be sooo happy to receive such a beauty from tiff''s!
36.gif

those stones are quite similar, so i would probably just go with the slightly larger stone as well. besides, i like the table size better. that''s the breaker for me.
28.gif
 
Gosh, that is a tough choice. Ordinarily I''d say the larger, but that stone is very deep and makes the diameter smaller than it coulf be if it wasn''t deep. It''s best to try to get less than 62% depth. That stone does have excellent on cut, polish, and symmetry, which is nice. The other has a table that is out of the ideal range and it has very good on the polish and symmetry. I think I would not want that stone. So between the two, I guess I''d take the 1.42. The sad thing is, I''m sure you know you can get a better cut 1.5 F VS1 for around $18,000. I love Tiffany, too, but the diamonds are just not the best cut considering the price.
 
If your budget is that large, I agree with Skippy! Contact SignedPieces for more info on that one!
 
Thanks for replying so quick, everyone!

@Skippy123 Thanks for the links to the non-Tiffany diamponds, but it''s really something my girlfriend has always dreamed of (she is normally not so much into brands, but when it comes to the engagement ring...). I also went to Cartier, but they did a miserable job in assisting me, and I am still waiting for a phone call with what they got to offer (it was only a small branch and they needed to call other branches).

That 2 ca Tiffany ring is gigantic! It''s incredible how much the price is down from the retail value. Is that common for used rings? The problem is that I don''t live in the States (I am from Europe), so going for something like this would be very difficult for me organizational wise.

@diamondseeker2006 Thanks for the detailed info. Of course it makes me worry when I hear your explanation on the less than perfect depth ratio. Perhaps the given Tiffany price ($25.600 (incl. tax)) sounds less "bad" if you take into consideration that it comes with a bead-set band (I don''t have the total carat of the side stone with me).
 
Well it''s almost exactly the price of the 1.42 ca ring I got quoted in the store (with a bead-set band, but stilL!). Before, I was pretty sure about my intended purchase, but you guys managed within minutes to make me less sure... which I appreciate of course ;)
 
Date: 7/3/2007 4:55:40 PM
Author: doctorow
Thanks for replying so quick, everyone!

@Skippy123 Thanks for the links to the non-Tiffany diamponds, but it''s really something my girlfriend has always dreamed of (she is normally not so much into brands, but when it comes to the engagement ring...). I also went to Cartier, but they did a miserable job in assisting me, and I am still waiting for a phone call with what they got to offer (it was only a small branch and they needed to call other branches).

That 2 ca Tiffany ring is gigantic! It''s incredible how much the price is down from the retail value. Is that common for used rings? The problem is that I don''t live in the States (I am from Europe), so going for something like this would be very difficult for me organizational wise.

@diamondseeker2006 Thanks for the detailed info. Of course it makes me worry when I hear your explanation on the less than perfect depth ratio. Perhaps the given Tiffany price ($25.600 (incl. tax)) sounds less ''bad'' if you take into consideration that it comes with a bead-set band (I don''t have the total carat of the side stone with me).
Click to expand...
Yip, true. Best wishes. Signed Pieces may allow you to return it if you do not like it. Just a thought.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 4:44:54 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Gosh, that is a tough choice. Ordinarily I''d say the larger, but that stone is very deep and makes the diameter smaller than it coulf be if it wasn''t deep. It''s best to try to get less than 62% depth. That stone does have excellent on cut, polish, and symmetry, which is nice. The other has a table that is out of the ideal range and it has very good on the polish and symmetry. I think I would not want that stone. So between the two, I guess I''d take the 1.42. The sad thing is, I''m sure you know you can get a better cut 1.5 F VS1 for around $18,000. I love Tiffany, too, but the diamonds are just not the best cut considering the price.
Click to expand...
For the record I have no business relationship with Tiffany''s.I have however consulted for a factory that is one of the contract manufacturers for Tiffany''s.
You might know that Tiffany issues its own grading report.What you might not know is that from my experience Tiffany is SUPER strict when it comes to grading.
It may be possible for a stone to be H SI1 at Tiffany and get G VS2 at GIA .They are equally strict when it comes to proportion and symmetry.So don''t discount them lightly.Yes,they are more expensive,but hey,would you watch a movie called Breakfast at Ebay''s?
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:04:19 PM
Author: junior35

Date: 7/3/2007 4:44:54 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Gosh, that is a tough choice. Ordinarily I''d say the larger, but that stone is very deep and makes the diameter smaller than it coulf be if it wasn''t deep. It''s best to try to get less than 62% depth. That stone does have excellent on cut, polish, and symmetry, which is nice. The other has a table that is out of the ideal range and it has very good on the polish and symmetry. I think I would not want that stone. So between the two, I guess I''d take the 1.42. The sad thing is, I''m sure you know you can get a better cut 1.5 F VS1 for around $18,000. I love Tiffany, too, but the diamonds are just not the best cut considering the price.
Click to expand...
For the record I have no business relationship with Tiffany''s.I have however consulted for a factory that is one of the contract manufacturers for Tiffany''s.
You might know that Tiffany issues its own grading report.What you might not know is that from my experience Tiffany is SUPER strict when it comes to grading.
It may be possible for a stone to be H SI1 at Tiffany and get G VS2 at GIA .They are equally strict when it comes to proportion and symmetry.So don''t discount them lightly.Yes,they are more expensive,but hey,would you watch a movie called Breakfast at Ebay''s?
Click to expand...
Hahahahaahahahaa I almost spit my Diet Pepsi on the screen when I read that.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:04:19 PM
Author: junior35





Date: 7/3/2007 4:44:54 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Gosh, that is a tough choice. Ordinarily I'd say the larger, but that stone is very deep and makes the diameter smaller than it coulf be if it wasn't deep. It's best to try to get less than 62% depth. That stone does have excellent on cut, polish, and symmetry, which is nice. The other has a table that is out of the ideal range and it has very good on the polish and symmetry. I think I would not want that stone. So between the two, I guess I'd take the 1.42. The sad thing is, I'm sure you know you can get a better cut 1.5 F VS1 for around $18,000. I love Tiffany, too, but the diamonds are just not the best cut considering the price.
Click to expand...
For the record I have no business relationship with Tiffany's.I have however consulted for a factory that is one of the contract manufacturers for Tiffany's.
You might know that Tiffany issues its own grading report.What you might not know is that from my experience Tiffany is SUPER strict when it comes to grading.
It may be possible for a stone to be H SI1 at Tiffany and get G VS2 at GIA .They are equally strict when it comes to proportion and symmetry.So don't discount them lightly.Yes,they are more expensive,but hey,would you watch a movie called Breakfast at Ebay's?
Click to expand...
I never heard of that before!!!! You should post that on a new thread and I think what you are saying does not sound right. Why would GIA give a bad certificate??? That does not make sense Junior
33.gif


ETA: the Tiffany on signed pieces does have a GIA cert giving it an H SI grading.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:11:10 PM
Author: Skippy123


Date: 7/3/2007 5:04:19 PM
Author: junior35





Date: 7/3/2007 4:44:54 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Gosh, that is a tough choice. Ordinarily I'd say the larger, but that stone is very deep and makes the diameter smaller than it coulf be if it wasn't deep. It's best to try to get less than 62% depth. That stone does have excellent on cut, polish, and symmetry, which is nice. The other has a table that is out of the ideal range and it has very good on the polish and symmetry. I think I would not want that stone. So between the two, I guess I'd take the 1.42. The sad thing is, I'm sure you know you can get a better cut 1.5 F VS1 for around $18,000. I love Tiffany, too, but the diamonds are just not the best cut considering the price.
Click to expand...
For the record I have no business relationship with Tiffany's.I have however consulted for a factory that is one of the contract manufacturers for Tiffany's.
You might know that Tiffany issues its own grading report.What you might not know is that from my experience Tiffany is SUPER strict when it comes to grading.
It may be possible for a stone to be H SI1 at Tiffany and get G VS2 at GIA .They are equally strict when it comes to proportion and symmetry.So don't discount them lightly.Yes,they are more expensive,but hey,would you watch a movie called Breakfast at Ebay's?
Click to expand...
I never heard of that before!!!! You should post that on a new thread and I think what you are saying does not sound right. Why would GIA give a bad certificate???
Click to expand...
Did I say that GIA gives a bad certificate?
There are cases when color and purity are borderline.In those cases Tiffany errs on the safe side.That's all.
 
Well, what the Tiffany sales person told me was that sometimes it''s not so obvious where to place a ring, and if a ring is somewhere between two colors or two clarity grades, Tiffany always chooses the worse when labeling their stones. Might be b/s, but I have to admit that the rings I''ve seen were very nice, and that I am really not an expert when it comes to diamonds. Plus, I live in Europe where the Online market for rings is less developed than in the US.

I know, I pay extra for Tiffany, and I am willing to pay the markup. The only thing I don''t know is about the particular rings if there is something alarming about the specs that I should know and that would henceforth force me to pass them. diamondseeker2006 mentioned the high depth ratio which could be an issue. Is it really that bad? Should I go to the sales person tomorrow and tell her that the depth is something that worries me. The problem is, both rings are still in transit, they are being sent from another Tiffany location. So I haven''t had a chance to see them yet. And even if I did, I am afraid that my inexperienced eye wouldn''t be able to tell the difference.

I must admit the 2 ca ring Skippy showed me is intriguing... I cannot believe it''s the same price I''d pay for 1.42, although the color grade is maybe somewhat lower and that it''s a solitaire ring.
 
Junior,
The Tiffany diamond on signed pieces does have a GIA cert giving it an H VS1 grading.
 
It says VS1 here. Identical to the Tiffany certificate below.
 
Best wishes Doctorow, you are very sweet to honor your girlfriends wishes!!!
9.gif
35.gif
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:20:27 PM
Author: Skippy123
Junior,
The Tiffany diamond on signed pieces does have a GIA cert giving it an H SI grading.
Click to expand...
That''s fine.But when they issue their own grading the buyer can have full confidence. It''s not some schlock document.


Cheers
 
well as far as which one is stricter, Tiffany does financially guarantee their grading whereas GIA doesn''t.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:28:06 PM
Author: junior35

That''s fine.But when they issue their own grading the buyer can have full confidence. It''s not some schlock document.


Cheers
Click to expand...
WhiteFlash does the same.
 
I would go for that 2ct from signed pieces (unless you are heart set on the band having diamonds also)... 2ct is yum!
18.gif
 
I must admit I am very much in doubt now. 2 carat is like another league. So here I am with a new 1.42 carat F-VS1 ring with bead-set band (Depth: 62.5%, Table: 56%), versus a used 2.0 carat H-VS1 solitaire ring (Depth: 59.4%, Table: 60%). The 1.42 one I could pick up in a couple of days, the 2.0 would be more difficult since I don't live in the US. Both are nearly the same price. Both are from Tiffany (one for sure, and the other I guess too if Signed Pieces has a good reputation).
 
I''d be all over the 2ct from Signed Pieces..........there is just something about a 2ct solitaire that MELTS ME!!!!!!!!!!!
30.gif


It''s just way too hard for me to justify the prices at Tiffany''s............
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:41:20 PM
Author: doctorow
I must admit I am very much in doubt now. 2 carat is like another league. So here I am with a new 1.42 carat F-VS1 ring with bead-set band (Depth: 62.5%, Table: 56%), versus a used 2.0 carat H-VS1 solitaire ring (Depth: 59.4%, Table: 60%). The 1.42 one I could pick up in a couple of days, the 2.0 would be more difficult since I don''t live in the US. Both are nearly the same price.
Click to expand...



I still say 2ct!
30.gif

Seriously, do what you are most comfortable with, but I am sure that if you call Signed Pieces directly you can work something out regarding living in Europe.


And the used ring can be polished to look like brand new, so no biggie there.

 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:45:10 PM
Author: poshpepper

Date: 7/3/2007 5:41:20 PM
Author: doctorow
I must admit I am very much in doubt now. 2 carat is like another league. So here I am with a new 1.42 carat F-VS1 ring with bead-set band (Depth: 62.5%, Table: 56%), versus a used 2.0 carat H-VS1 solitaire ring (Depth: 59.4%, Table: 60%). The 1.42 one I could pick up in a couple of days, the 2.0 would be more difficult since I don''t live in the US. Both are nearly the same price.
Click to expand...




I still say 2ct!
30.gif


Seriously, do what you are most comfortable with, but I am sure that if you call Signed Pieces directly you can work something out regarding living in Europe.



And the used ring can be polished to look like brand new, so no biggie there.

Click to expand...
I agree and I think UCLABelle bought a Tiffany from another store and Tiffany''s honors their policy such as sizing, etc.

A few people from England bought diamonds from the US and it ended up being cheaper. Do a search on Maisie''s ring and I think she talks about it.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:28:06 PM
Author: junior35

Date: 7/3/2007 5:20:27 PM
Author: Skippy123
Junior,
The Tiffany diamond on signed pieces does have a GIA cert giving it an H SI grading.
Click to expand...
That''s fine.But when they issue their own grading the buyer can have full confidence. It''s not some schlock document.


Cheers
Click to expand...
Junior, generally ideal cut is around 34-35% crown angle, 54-57% table, 60-62.3% depth, and so on. Neither of those stones would qualify as AGS0, I don''t think. I could be wrong, but I think each has characteristics that would not allow them to be AGS0/ideal. I fully trust the Tiffany info. But as Skippy said, most Tiffany diamonds I have seen also had comparable GIA certificates. The one she linked on Signed Pieces has the same color and clarity on the Tiffany and GIA certs. I certainly think Tiffany diamonds are fine. Maybe they are in the top 10% of diamonds. I just think they should be the very top cuts at the prices they charge.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 5:41:20 PM
Author: doctorow
I must admit I am very much in doubt now. 2 carat is like another league. So here I am with a new 1.42 carat F-VS1 ring with bead-set band (Depth: 62.5%, Table: 56%), versus a used 2.0 carat H-VS1 solitaire ring (Depth: 59.4%, Table: 60%). The 1.42 one I could pick up in a couple of days, the 2.0 would be more difficult since I don''t live in the US. Both are nearly the same price. Both are from Tiffany (one for sure, and the other I guess too if Signed Pieces has a good reputation).
Click to expand...
How much did she want the bead-set setting? Would she love the plain solitaire? That is a terrific deal on the one at SP. They are very reputable. No worries there! But I wouldn''t do it if she really wanted the other setting. I personally love the plain Tiffany setting, though!
 
Date: 7/3/2007 6:50:37 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 7/3/2007 5:28:06 PM
Author: junior35


Date: 7/3/2007 5:20:27 PM
Author: Skippy123
Junior,
The Tiffany diamond on signed pieces does have a GIA cert giving it an H SI grading.
Click to expand...
That''s fine.But when they issue their own grading the buyer can have full confidence. It''s not some schlock document.


Cheers
Click to expand...
Junior, generally ideal cut is around 34-35% crown angle, 54-57% table, 60-62.3% depth, and so on. Neither of those stones would qualify as AGS0, I don''t think. I could be wrong, but I think each has characteristics that would not allow them to be AGS0/ideal. I fully trust the Tiffany info. But as Skippy said, most Tiffany diamonds I have seen also had comparable GIA certificates. The one she linked on Signed Pieces has the same color and clarity on the Tiffany and GIA certs. I certainly think Tiffany diamonds are fine. Maybe they are in the top 10% of diamonds. I just think they should be the very top cuts at the prices they charge.
Click to expand...
Ask any Asian (ex Japan)customers what they think about 54% tables and get ready for some good laughs.Who decided that small tables are beautiful and large (60-61%) are not?
The whole craze of ideal cuts was started by the Japanese in the late 80''s(I know because I was in the middle of it). Until then everyone was happy to buy nice Belgian or Russian goods all with crown angles of 31/32 maybe 33 degrees and 60-62% tables.
All I can tell you is that a beautifully cut stone with 60% depth and 60 % table can still get triple EX at GIA and justifiably so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top