What do you guys think

[gduncan]

What do you guy think
1.62
h
si1 eye clean
57 table
61.9
ex
ex
ex
Click on view cert for more info. The specs on this stone are the same as the one im looking at other than mine is 1k cheaper and .02 carats less

http://www.adiamor.com/D-7734963.htm

 

[Kelli]

Looks pretty good to me and scores really well on the HCA. I would probably go for it if you have a return period to look it over, but some people on ps would probably request more info before buying.

 

[Lorelei]

I would ask for an Idealscope image and also ask concerning the clouds for the clarity grade, that they aren''t affecting the light return of this diamond in any way - I don''t know if this is an in house stone, so they might need to call it in, check with them.

 

[dockman3]

Wait a second, I''m confused...

The specs you wrote down don''t match the specs of the diamond you linked to, specifically the carat wt of 1.62 instead of 1.64 on the diamond in the link. You say that "yours" is 1k cheaper and 0.02 ct less. Does that mean that you are not looking at the diamond in the link? If so, we need more info to tell you about the diamond that is 1.62 ct. We need girdle thickness and crown and pavilion angles at a minimum. Diameter and depth measurements would be good too. Even if the diamond has the same table size and depth percentage, it doesn''t mean that the angles are going to be the same. Get us the diamond report of the stone you want us to evaluate, not just another diamond that is close to it. My guess is that there is a reason "yours" is 1k cheaper, and that''s probably due to a slightly different cut or bad inclusions or some other factor.

 

[gduncan]

dockman3 all the angles everything, girdle thickness, crown and pavilion angles are all the same(i was shocked too). I have the diamond in hand. I also have the gia report but i was lazy and didnt want to typ or scan it in. The diamond is eye clean i cant tell anything is wronge unless i pull out the scope. I had the diamond sent to a local appraiser and looked at. The olny differences are different inclusion spots, the price and the lack of .02 size. Which makes it .03mm smaller on both top measurments.( nothing you could see)
I asked and they told me none of the inclusions blocked any light return and that it was eye clean. ( I thought if you couldnt see the inclusion then it didnt bother the light return is that wronge.) And it is eye clean unlike some of the other stones that i saw from other stores.

 

[gduncan]

Also is this diamond considered on the deep steep side of ideal or....?

 

[dockman3]

Wow, that''s good to hear! Yes, technically it is on the steep/deep side of ideal, but still falls within the ideal range. If you have it in hand and it looks good to you, I don''t see any problems with it. Be sure to come back with pictures when it is all set!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/6/2008 9:56:07 AM
Author: gduncan
Also is this diamond considered on the deep steep side of ideal or....?

Borderline, but it could well be fine. Check it out in different lighting conditions.

 

[gduncan]

It sparkles like crazy with tons of fire. Looks good in all lighting conditions. Outside looks 100% white but when under old fashion light bulbs(not cfl) i can see a hint of yellow. I guess im good at seeing color. When a local dealer showed me a 1.7ish ex ex ex I colored gia i instantly told him it looked yellow.

The guy who set it today messed up the prongs that leon mege made.

 

[gduncan]

here is a pic

 

[Lorelei]

It looks beautiful, I really love it!!!

 

[gduncan]

i took this one under low light conditions to show what i see when looking in the loop. There is a inclusion on the left side of the center of the stone. Kinda looks a lil gray. Would this hurt any light return. The rest of the inclusions are hard to find.

 

[dockman3]

Nope, that shouldn''t affect light return at all. It looks like a gorgeous stone! Congratulations!

 

[gduncan]

Thanks, I hope she likes it im giving it to her tomorrow night. ( yea thats my ugly pinky lol)