what is the most economical cut?

[Carats]

For a given carat size, what is the cheapest cut? I was comparing rounds and radiants for example and it seems that for a given size, rounds are much more expensive - but i was wondering if maybe in order for the radiant of a given size to look as good as round you''d have to go up in color/clarity for example and hence make up for the difference in price?? Any advice on this? I''m pretty open to different cuts - all i want is something economical and sparkly...

 

[fanboy]

You should look a the ratio of the face-up size to the carat weight. Cushions and ovals look huge given their carat weights because they tend to be flatter stones.

 

[vespergirl]

To get the most bang for your buck, I would look at elongated shapes. Marquises and pears look very large for their carat weight - my mom''s 1.5 carat marquise looks three times the size of my 2.2 carat asscher. If you don''t like "pointy", ovals also look huge.

I would stay away from the more square or rectagular shapes - emeralds and radiants are long, but usually much deeper than ovals, marquises and pears, so they won''t look as big. You may see some less expensive emerald cuts (step cuts usually cost less than brilliant cuts) but if you find a cheap one the quality probably won''t be very good - with step cuts in particular (emerald) you need to go very high in color and clarity for the stone to look nice, so you''re better off finding a nice marquise, pear or oval.

Even though I love the "pointy" edges of marquises and pears, some people find their look to be a little dated (they were very popular in the 80s) but ovals are very popular right now and have a classic, timeless shape. Plus, if your girl likes round brilliants, she would probably like an oval the best of the three, so that would be your safest bet.

 

[jstarfireb]

You mentioned color/clarity for radiants...it''s true that radiants show color much more so than rounds. That''s why most fancy colored diamonds are cut as radiants. I don''t think clarity is an issue with radiants like it is for step cuts.

Ovals look huge! My mom has a gorgeous oval. Unlike rounds, they''re tough to judge by the numbers, so you really need to see the stone in person before buying it. I believe ovals can have an ugly "bowtie" effect with light extinction in the middle if they''re poorly cut.

You might find this chart interesting (it''s a PDF):
http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 6/18/2007 11:33:41 AM
Author: fanboy
You should look a the ratio of the face-up size to the carat weight. Cushions and ovals look huge given their carat weights because they tend to be flatter stones.

Ovals yes, cushions generally not. They usually actually face up smaller than rounds of the same carat weight unless they are super shallow.

For the most bang for your buck pears, marquise, and ovals are surely the way to go.

Princesses and some other square/step shapes like asschers are probably the worst.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 6/18/2007 12:45:22 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 6/18/2007 11:33:41 AM
Author: fanboy
You should look a the ratio of the face-up size to the carat weight. Cushions and ovals look huge given their carat weights because they tend to be flatter stones.

Ovals yes, cushions generally not. They usually actually face up smaller than rounds of the same carat weight unless they are super shallow.

For the most bang for your buck pears, marquise, and ovals are surely the way to go.

Princesses and some other square/step shapes like asschers are probably the worst.

Ditto.

 

[Gypsy]

Fanboy... not true at all with cushions, asschers and other cut cornered squares. You might be able to find a shallow good looking radiant or cushion... but they are pretty rare. Same with asschers.

OVALS, pears and marquise give you the most bang for the buck-- their spread is comparable to rounds... but they cost less per carat.

Someone.. somewhere on her has a chart that makes this REALLY clear. But you can take my word on it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

No such thing as cheap or economical when it comes to diamonds! Except I''d recommend buying from a respected online jeweler to get the best price for high quality stones.

Also, it might be best if you refer to shapes as opposed to cut, because you want an excellent cut diamond no matter which shape you buy!

And if you are a guy, the best shape is the shape your girlfriend likes the best. I''d never buy a stone based on which was most economical if it wasn''t what she likes the most.

Here is a chart comparing sizes of various shapes of diamonds:

http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf#search="amazon%20diamond%20size%20chart"

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 6/18/2007 1:41:44 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
No such thing as cheap or economical when it comes to diamonds! Except I''d recommend buying from a respected online jeweler to get the best price for high quality stones.

Also, it might be best if you refer to shapes as opposed to cut, because you want an excellent cut diamond no matter which shape you buy!

And if you are a guy, the best shape is the shape your girlfriend likes the best. I''d never buy a stone based on which was most economical if it wasn''t what she likes the most.

Here is a chart comparing sizes of various shapes of diamonds:

http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf#search="amazon%20diamond%20size%20chart"

See.. there''s that chart!

Ditto everything else DS said, too.

 

[jstarfireb]

Not sure what your budget is, but here are some nice looking ovals:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/2859/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/2053/ - LOVE the shape of this one, as well as the clarity/color combo
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/3268/d

And here''s the only marquise on Good Old Gold (looks very nice to me):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/3176/

 

[kcoursolle]

Marquise and pears face up large and are cheaper stones. Radiants are also cheaper stones relative to rounds, but do not necessarily face up large. Many are cut deap. However, if you can find a radiant in the 60-64 depth range, it will face up large and will cost less than a round.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 6/18/2007 11:33:41 AM
Author: fanboy
You should look a the ratio of the face-up size to the carat weight. Cushions and ovals look huge given their carat weights because they tend to be flatter stones.

I''d say this about ovals and marquise but it is only true *some* of the time for cushions, far more often cushions look small for their weight and frequently look approrpirate for their weight. I''ve only seen a few pass by here that were shallow enough to consider spready.