shape
carat
color
clarity
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. PriceScope Upgrade Completed
    For issues, questions and comments click the link below
    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pricescope-upgraded-comments-and-issues.229551/

    Dismiss Notice

Which diamond do you recommend?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by kingfish, Oct 28, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kingfish
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    by kingfish » Oct 28, 2008
    I'm about to buy an e-ring and these are the two stones I have on hold and I'm looking at. I'd appreciate your advice. Both seem to be pretty good stones from what I can tell. The second is a bit less expensive. Which would you guys recommend?

    Diamond 1 Proportions:

    Depth: 60.3 %
    Table: 58 %
    Crown Angle: 35°
    Pavilion Angle: 40.6°
    Star length: 50 %
    Lower Half: 80 %
    Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
    Culet: None


    Diamond 2 Proportions:

    Depth: 62.4 %
    Table: 54.9 %
    Crown Angle: 35.5°
    Pavilion Angle: 40.5°
    Star length: 50 %
    Lower Half: 80 %
    Girdle: 1.9%-4.3%
    Culet: None

    Both do pretty well on the HCA, with the second having a slightly smaller spread. I'd appreciate all your thoughts, thanks in advance!
     
  2. Mrs W
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    810
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    by Mrs W » Oct 28, 2008
    i would not buy stone two and stone 1 is ok but you could do sooo much better
     
  3. kingfish
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    by kingfish » Oct 28, 2008
    Really, why are they bad? They seemed okay to me. Am I missing something?
     
  4. Stone-cold11
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    14,069
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    by Stone-cold11 » Oct 28, 2008
    Both looks fine to me from the numbers. Got any IS for comparison?
     
  5. Lorelei
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    40,758
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    by Lorelei » Oct 29, 2008
    No not bad at all, you are not missing anything that I can see, Idealscopes would be the next step - ask the vendor if they can provide them.
     
  6. kingfish
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    by kingfish » Oct 29, 2008
    Thanks guys, I thought they looked pretty good, I was wondering why Mrs W seemed a bit hesitant about them.
     
  7. arjunajane
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    9,758
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    by arjunajane » Oct 29, 2008
    ? How come Mrs?
     
  8. Lorelei
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    40,758
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    by Lorelei » Oct 29, 2008
    I really don't know why, but I would like to in case she has been given some incorrect info on evaluating diamonds.[​IMG] She is a new poster.
     
  9. Mrs W
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    810
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    by Mrs W » Oct 29, 2008
    I would not not buy stone 2 bc i really don't like buying diamonds with a depth of more than 62.2 and the crown angle is 35.5 i think the crown angle should just be like 35.1 or under but with #1 stone i think you could get a smaller table, crown angle is not really bad but you could do better like something in the 34's and i do not think #1 is bad
     
  10. Lorelei
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    40,758
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    by Lorelei » Oct 29, 2008
    I see thanks for your reply! I take it you mean the second diamond? The crown angle is actually fine, more crucial is the pavilion angle, there can be wider acceptable variance with crown angles than pavilion - the key is how well the crown and pavilion angles work together to balance each other.
     
  11. Mrs W
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    810
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    by Mrs W » Oct 29, 2008

    edit above
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page