Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity
  • Pricescope Upgrade/Maintenance Is Complete.

    We still have a few things to iron out. If you see any bugs, issues or have any concerns, let us know here in this discussion.

Which of these is the best value?

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

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18

Hey Everyone,


First I'd like to say thank you to everyone who takes the time to post and provide opinions. All of the information has ve been extremely helpful. I have narrowed my selection down to a few different stones and was hoping that some of the experts could weigh in and let me know which looks like the best value. I attached an image of a spreadsheet that had the stones in it so it would be easier to read and compare. All of these stones are on the net, so I haven't seen any of them in person. Also, I have not been able to get any idealscope images.

Also, my GF is very wants size but I want to get the best quality stone I can afford. She wanted something in the 2 Ct. range, but I decided to drop down in size a little to get some better quality. I tried to pick stones with big tables to maximize the size perception for the carrat weight, but not sure how well I did. If it's not too much trouble, I'd also love to get some opinions on how the table size matches up with the carrat weight for these stone.

Thanks!

compare.gif
 

JulieN

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
13,321
You did leave out the girdle information.

Let's throw out the 1.71 H VS2

When talking best value, there are large price breaks at I and SI1, though color perception is a legitimate concern at this size.

But it seems you're saying one thing (you're giving up the 2 cts that your girlfriend wants in order to have higher quality) but want another (best value)?
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
Sorry about that - I knew I would forget something! Here it is with the girdle info. Also, I shrunk it down a bit - I had no idea it was going to look so monsterous on the screen!

Just to clarify my original post, what I meant by value is "which of these stones is the best value based on the price being quoted." I feel like all the stones are within the quality/size range that I am looking for, but just want to make sure I am not over paying. However, any other suggestions or input that any of you might have (i.e. I is too low a color for this type of stone, etc.) would be much appreciated. I hope that clears up what I meant.

Thanks again!

compare1.gif
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
I would choose the 1.75 I VS2. It is Ideal, EX/EX, with a great HCA score. The faint flourescence may help the I-color look whiter.

There is a study here in the Knowledge section about the different certifying organizations. It's really interesting - the same diamonds were sent to 3 labs, including GIA and AGS and the classifications of the diamonds compared. The study found that AGS is sometimes stricter than GIA on clarity, but more frequently AGS is less strict on color than GIA. Without seeing these diamonds in person, would the AGS "I" be a GIA "I" or might it be a "J"? I'd wonder and therefore probably stick with GIA certs since the crown/pavilion angles are available.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,070
These are just my thoughts on the stones. If I had to choose one of these, it would be the first one.

#1, good specs, and H color

#2, table too big (54-58 best), and crown angle too low (34-35 best), only good polish

#3, crown angle higher than ideal (34-35 best)

#4, thick girdle

#5, okay, but I'd rather have the H color in #1
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
I read on one of the forum posts that you have to be careful with Polish and Flourescence. If the Polish isn''t great, the flouro can make the diamond look oily. The stronger the flouro, the worse the effect. Therefore, I would agree that #2 isn''t worth the price. Are you planning to see these diamonds?
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
Thanks everyone for your input - its really helpful! I am planning on seeing the diamonds before I make the "final" purchase. By this, I mean I'll have the stone sent to me and if it isn't up to par, then send it back. I'd rather have a good idea that the stone is the one before I undertake this process so I'm not paying multiple shipping costs, etc.

The polish was the one thing that I was concerned about on the second diamond. I talked to someone who saw the stone and they said that in daylight and office light the stone did not look hazy or oily despite the strong flouro. Are there any other negative effects that might come about because of the flouro or the good polish? There is also a possibility that I can get this stone for 12,100 instead of 12,500. Would this additional info make the second stone a better buy in anyone's opinion?

The first one is a great stone - I am just wondering if it is worth the 13K price tag or if anyone thinks that I might be able to get something similar for a little less.

I also think that the 1.75 ct. stone is great, but I am wondering if the I color will have a large negative impact on a 1.75 ct. stone. If so, would the faint flouro be enough to offset the I color so that the stone still looks white?
 

Kaleigh

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
29,570
Date: 11/27/2006 11:26:40 PM
Author: starryeyed
I read on one of the forum posts that you have to be careful with Polish and Flourescence. If the Polish isn't great, the flouro can make the diamond look oily. The stronger the flouro, the worse the effect. Therefore, I would agree that #2 isn't worth the price. Are you planning to see these diamonds?
Fluoresence is fine if the stone doesn't appear milky or coudy. There are many of us here that have stones with fluoresence and are big fans of it. I own 2 that have it. My asscher has strong blue and it's clear as day. So you can't generalize here. FYI!!!
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Hi Kaleigh. I hope I didn''t offend you. I think flouro is a pretty cool phenomena. I certainly was not generalizing that fluoro is bad. I had read that the one of the reasons why Strong Blues can look oily or hazy is because of Polish issues. I had also read that surface and internal graining can make Strong Blues look hazy too. I''m not saying that all Strong Blues look hazy. I am certainly not an expert, so I would defer to any expert on this topic.
 

JulieN

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
13,321
No, faint fluor isn''t going to help an I color be any whiter.

Are the AGS reports light performance based?

And why no H SI1?
 

DBM

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
404
Date: 11/27/2006 5:45:39 PM
Author:mindscape9


Also, my GF is very wants size but I want to get the best quality stone I can afford. She wanted something in the 2 Ct. range, but I decided to drop down in size a little to get some better quality. I tried to pick stones with big tables to maximize the size perception for the carrat weight, but not sure how well I did. If it''s not too much trouble, I''d also love to get some opinions on how the table size matches up with the carrat weight for these stone.

Thanks!
Maybe you just erringly meant the diameter but just to point out, Table size has nothing to do with the face up size of the stone. Table size is the measure of the diamonds "TABLE" from one kite facet to the extreme opposite.

if you want a sense of face up size you go by the measurements primarilyl and by the depth. the lower the depth the better chance that more of the weight is distributed "on the top" and spreadier.
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
JulieN - Thanks for the posts. How can I tell if the AGS reports are light performance based? I''m not sure if this reflects a change in the grading methodology by AGS or not, but if it helps, both AGS stones were graded in 2006 - the I, SI1 in Feb and the I VS2 in Oct.

I would like to find an H, SI1, that is well cut and in my price range but have not been able to locate one yet. I''ll keep looking though and let you know if I find one. If you see one that you feel might be better than any of the ones posted her, please let me know!

Thanks!
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
DBM - you are right. I meant large in terms of the diameter. Thanks for correcting me.

JulieN - the I, SI1 is rated for a 0 on light performace by AGS. The other graded factors, proportion and finish, hare both rated 0 as well. The I, VS2 is not rated on light performance and is rated as Ideal (polish), VG (sym), and Ideal (proportions).

I''ve attached the AGS cert for the I, SI1 if that helps.

AGS000.gif
 

JulieN

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
13,321
So, I think the 1.72 H VS2 and the 1.70 I SI1 are my top picks.
#3 and #5 also look good by the numbers, but I'm slightly less interested in them, for reasons of my own biases and (ir)rationalities.


The H is going for about 12.5-.7K, PS and wire price, and the I about 10.5-.6K.

Call either James Allen or Whiteflash and they will be able to get Ideal Scope pictures for you, for some $ if you decide on not buying a stone to cover shipping expenses.

1.74 I VS1 cut with a shallower crown and larger pavilion to help the apparent color, also a bit spready.
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131&item=913751
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
JulieN - Thanks so much for your input! You seem to be putting these two stones in the same category so I was wondering, in your opinion, is the 1.72 H, VS worth the extra 2K over the 1.7, I, SI1? If they will look pretty much the same in the setting in terms of color, fire, and brightness, I would much rather go for the less expensive one. However, if you think there will be a noticeable difference, I might go with the 1.72. H.

I''ll contact both of those vendors today and see if I can get something setup to get some idealscope images as well.

If you have the time, I''d love to hear the biases that made you choose these two over #3 and #5 - I''m still learning so everything that I can pick up from others is helpful.

Thanks again!
 

the other Jake

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
423
It would be difficult for the average person to detect the difference between the H and the I side by side unset... let alone set and with nothing to compare it to.
 

Kim N

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,167
My top picks out of the ones mindscape posted are #3 and #5, the 1.75 I VS2 and the 1.7 I VS2. I really don''t like the 58+ tables on the others.

I do like the one starryeyed picked out, the 1.76 H SI1 from James Allen. Definitely check that one out too. That one is my top pick out of all of them.
 

mindscape9

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
18
Thanks everyone for all of your help! I actually decided to go with #1 based on a couple different factors:

I liked that it was an H and VS2
It has an excellent cut grade from GIA
It falls within the AGS ideal cut range on HCA and has a great HCA score
I like the medium blue flouro - it''s not alot, but good for me
The price was pretty good - $12,475

I am going to go see it in Chicago and have it looked at by an appraiser - Bill Miilne at Hakimian Gems.

Thanks again for your help! Now I just have to see if the place I am headed to has an idealscope or where I can get one on such short notice... :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top