Vache U113 vs Whiteflash Knife Edge 6 Prong Ring

[happilymarried]

I am looking at these 2 styles, in platinum. I have searched and found a lot of threads, but it's hard to decide without seeing them in person and holding them. Would love to hear from anyone who has decided one over the other. If anyone has seen them both in person I would love to hear your thoughts too. There is a 500 difference which I feel is pretty substantial. Does the one feel heavier than the other? Is the Vache more "refined" or finished smoother or somehow else better? I would love the ring to have a subtantial feel, which is why I chose platinum.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well, m2b has seen both because I have the Vatche (which she has seen) and she currently has the WF version. She knew she maybe would someday reset, so she chose the less expensive option. I am not sure, but I think the Vatche is a little less wide at about 2mm. I think she had them soften the knife edge a little on the WF one. She'll probably see this later and give her opinion.

 

[happilymarried]

Thanks for the reply. Is the Vache really only 2mm wide? That was another of my thoughts... Whiteflash lists the Vache width at 3.1 to 2.1mm. Does it get skinnier at the top or something?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Opposite...wider next to the head and narrower towards the bottom of the shank.

 

[m-2-b]

Yes, I have a modified version of the WF knife edge 6 prong setting and I think it is very well made/substantial in platinum. I happen to like DS's Vatche as well which is a classic style that many PS'ers own. It all depends upon your budget and if you care to have the designer brand attached to your ring.

 

[happilymarried]

Thanks!

Are there any noticeable differences between the 2 when you compared them?

Has anyone measured what exactly they are at the top (near the diamond)?

 

[msop04]

I'm glad I saw this thread, as I'm very interested in the settings for my upgrade.

DS and m-2-b, do you happen to have any shots of your rings that are up close and personal so that we can compare them? Also, what modifications were made to the WF setting besides softening the knife edge? m-2-b's looks so much more refined than the image on their website.

DS, do you know if the U113 is made to scale based on the size of the diamond? In other words, with the band be thicker for a 3 carat stone than, say, a 2 carat stone?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks for the reply. Is the Vache really only 2mm wide? That was another of my thoughts... Whiteflash lists the Vache width at 3.1 to 2.1mm. Does it get skinnier at the top or something?

I just realized I answered this wrong. I think the Vatche is about the same all the way around and is about 2mm wide. The WF version looks wider at the head and tapers to be narrower at the bottom of the shank.

I'm glad I saw this thread, as I'm very interested in the settings for my upgrade.

DS and m-2-b, do you happen to have any shots of your rings that are up close and personal so that we can compare them? Also, what modifications were made to the WF setting besides softening the knife edge? m-2-b's looks so much more refined than the image on their website.

DS, do you know if the U113 is made to scale based on the size of the diamond? In other words, with the band be thicker for a 3 carat stone than, say, a 2 carat stone?

m2b has much better pics of hers than I do of mine, but I will look and see what I have that might help. Too bad we haven't been together since she got her new ring, because we have taken pics before!

I will have to say that my guess is that they do have to scale the shank to some degree based on the size of the head. I just woudn't think it would be the same for a half carat and a 4.5 ct diamond. However, I did have about a 1.6 in my original setting and sent it back to Vatche when I upgraded to 2.3 cts, and they replaced the head. The ring looked brand new, but I think the shank was the same for that size difference in the two stones. Let me see what pics I might have.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

These are about the best showing width. The wedding band is the 2.2mm Tiffany Legacy and you can see that the Vatche is slightly thinner. The Vatche has Tiffany prongs and m2b asked WF to do claw prongs on hers. They are pretty tiny either way. I love that this setting makes it sooo easy to clean the diamond! Even though I am considering resetting my diamond in an antique style setting, my biggest hesitation is being able to clean the stone as easily as I can in this setting!

 

[msop04]

Ahhhh... I see the differences more clearly now. Thanks!

I wonder if Vatche would do claw prongs? [emoji848]

 

[Logan Sapphire]

Here's my sister's U113 (ignore my muffin top- my finger is a lot bigger than hers). I think the prongs were really well done.

 

[msop04]

Here's my sister's U113 (ignore my muffin top- my finger is a lot bigger than hers). I think the prongs were really well done.

Thanks for posting, LS! Is that how Vatche did them or did you request them to be more "clawed" than "tabbed"? I really like them!

 

[AdaBeta27]

There are some comparison side-by-side pics in this old thread that I found with Google:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/first-engagement-ring-help.205773/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/first-engagement-ring-help.205773/[/URL]

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Ahhhh... I see the differences more clearly now. Thanks!

I wonder if Vatche would do claw prongs? [emoji848]

You know, I never even asked that, but I think they possibly would judging from Logan's sister's ring. Mine was mistaken for a real Tiffany setting in Tiffany before, so they do the Tiffany prongs really well! You definitely would have to ask, because the standard way is the Tiffany tabs.

The other thing people ask for is the harder platinum alloys, either 90plat/10 iridium or 95plat/5ruthenium, and they did that at no extra charge.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

There are some comparison side-by-side pics in this old thread that I found with Google:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/first-engagement-ring-help.205773/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/first-engagement-ring-help.205773/[/URL]

Whoa, excellent! I am saving those for future use! Thank you!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, here they are. I think I prefer the finish on the Vatche (which is good since that is what I have).

 

[happilymarried]

Lots of great photos! Could anyone with the Vache measure the width at the top? Whiteflash lists it at 3.1 to 2.1. That's where I'm confused. It looks thinner than the other 2 in the photos above. They are listed around 2.5mm. Maybe the whiteflash has the specs wrong??

 

[wildcat03]

I can't measure mine right now, unfortunately, but wanted to chime in to say that I have the vatche u113 and I adore it. The prongs are PERFECT - I love claw prongs but can't imagine asking for anything different than the gorgeous tab prongs on my ring. I also think they set the diamond perfectly in terms of height.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Lots of great photos! Could anyone with the Vache measure the width at the top? Whiteflash lists it at 3.1 to 2.1. That's where I'm confused. It looks thinner than the other 2 in the photos above. They are listed around 2.5mm. Maybe the whiteflash has the specs wrong??

No possibility that those measurements are correct for my setting. Mine is basically the same size all the way around (or maybe the slightest bit narrower at the base) and is definitely not 3mm anywhere. The only thing I can imagine is that they maybe adjust the width based on the size of the diamond, but I have not observed that. Those measurements actually look more like they match their (WF) setting which is definitely tapered when you look at the side view.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Here is a 4 ct stone in the Vatche which belongs to Bliss. Still looks thin to me.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/3-98-rb-in-vatche-u113-thanks-to-idj.184808/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/3-98-rb-in-vatche-u113-thanks-to-idj.184808/[/URL]

 

[WinkHPD]

Thanks for the reply. Is the Vache really only 2mm wide? That was another of my thoughts... Whiteflash lists the Vache width at 3.1 to 2.1mm. Does it get skinnier at the top or something?

I just realized I answered this wrong. I think the Vatche is about the same all the way around and is about 2mm wide. The WF version looks wider at the head and tapers to be narrower at the bottom of the shank.

I'm glad I saw this thread, as I'm very interested in the settings for my upgrade.

DS and m-2-b, do you happen to have any shots of your rings that are up close and personal so that we can compare them? Also, what modifications were made to the WF setting besides softening the knife edge? m-2-b's looks so much more refined than the image on their website.

DS, do you know if the U113 is made to scale based on the size of the diamond? In other words, with the band be thicker for a 3 carat stone than, say, a 2 carat stone?

m2b has much better pics of hers than I do of mine, but I will look and see what I have that might help. Too bad we haven't been together since she got her new ring, because we have taken pics before!

I will have to say that my guess is that they do have to scale the shank to some degree based on the size of the head. I just woudn't think it would be the same for a half carat and a 4.5 ct diamond. However, I did have about a 1.6 in my original setting and sent it back to Vatche when I upgraded to 2.3 cts, and they replaced the head. The ring looked brand new, but I think the shank was the same for that size difference in the two stones. Let me see what pics I might have.

I just delivered a Vatche U-113 to a client in Australia who wanted to know the measurements of the shank. It started at 2.8 mm at the top and gradually tapered to 2 mm at the bottom. This was for a 1.77 ct diamond.

I have seen both rings in person and can say that both are beautiful well made rings and I do not believe you can make a mistake in choosing either ring.

Wink

 

[msop04]

I just delivered a Vatche U-113 to a client in Australia who wanted to know the measurements of the shank. It started at 2.8 mm at the top and gradually tapered to 2 mm at the bottom. This was for a 1.77 ct diamond.

I have seen both rings in person and can say that both are beautiful well made rings and I do not believe you can make a mistake in choosing either ring.

Wink

Out of curiosity, do you happen to know the approximate width of the U-113 for a 9.8 mm stone?

 

[WinkHPD]

I just delivered a Vatche U-113 to a client in Australia who wanted to know the measurements of the shank. It started at 2.8 mm at the top and gradually tapered to 2 mm at the bottom. This was for a 1.77 ct diamond.

I have seen both rings in person and can say that both are beautiful well made rings and I do not believe you can make a mistake in choosing either ring.

Wink

Out of curiosity, do you happen to know the approximate width of the U-113 for a 9.8 mm stone?

I am sorry, I do not.

Wink

 

[msop04]

I just delivered a Vatche U-113 to a client in Australia who wanted to know the measurements of the shank. It started at 2.8 mm at the top and gradually tapered to 2 mm at the bottom. This was for a 1.77 ct diamond.

I have seen both rings in person and can say that both are beautiful well made rings and I do not believe you can make a mistake in choosing either ring.

Wink

Out of curiosity, do you happen to know the approximate width of the U-113 for a 9.8 mm stone?

I am sorry, I do not.

Wink

No worries!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

msop...Bliss' ring just doesn't really look wider than mine. If it is, it would be very slight. This diamond is right at 4 cts.

 

[msop04]

msop...Bliss' ring just doesn't really look wider than mine. If it is, it would be very slight. This diamond is right at 4 cts.

That's kinda what I was thinking, regarding the width comparison. [emoji1303]

 

[happilymarried]

If someone could measure their Vatche U113, I would love to know what the width is. I emailed whiteflash and they said that it is correct on the site, 3.1mm at the top going to 2.1 at the bottom. I have noticed in the photos showing all 3 rings, the one photo you can tell that the Vatche is smaller to scale than the others. It looks more like a pinky ring next to the other 2 on the left. Still, all the other photos seem to prove that it is narrower than 3.1mm. The photo with the comparsion next to the tiffany wedding band is a good example.

 

[panda_eyes66]

Any new photos?

I am currently trying to choose between these two settings but am worried that they may look too big with a 0.8 ct diamond. Does anyone have this size and can add a photo?

Thanks