shape
carat
color
clarity

which of these settings is best for a 2.3 ct round brilliant?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by stanley515, Jan 10, 2019.

  1. stanley515
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
    by stanley515 » Jan 10, 2019
    Thanks to everyone in advance for their input! I'm wondering which of these two settings would go best with a 2.3 ct round brilliant (dimensions approximately 8.5 x 8.5 x 5.2). They are both solitaire 14k white gold 6 prong settings. The price difference between them is negligible in the grand scheme so I was just hoping to choose the setting that is best for this diamond.

    Ring size: 4.75

    1) https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...ni-1rz7295-solitaire-engagement-ring-4031.htm
    Width: 1.65 mm
    Thickness: n/a
    Center diamond size range: 0.4-2.99 ct

    2) https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...ffany-style-solitaire-engagement-ring-582.htm
    Width: 2.30 mm
    Thickness: 1.60 mm
    Center diamond size range: 0.4-4.99 ct

    The thinner band is appealing to a novice like myself since I assume it'd make the diamond appear larger (which is something I am looking for). But are there any downsides to the 1.65 mm width for a 2.3 ct (is the band too small or would it feel flimsy or insecure?). Are there pros and cons for the 2.30 mm width? Will the 2.3 mm band still look quite thin and have a nice accentuating effect on the diamond? Thanks!!
     
  2. Morenita21
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    157
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2018
    by Morenita21 » Jan 10, 2019
    Has your significant other pointed out some settings she likes?
     
  3. stanley515
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
  4. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,058
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Jan 10, 2019
    My personal advice is to select them more substantial setting. You will have a nice sized diamond and you would want a setting that can support it.

    I have had the classic 2.3mm solitaire setting that you are considering. It is much more delicate in person and it has a nice rounded edge, so it appear thinner from the top.

    Here is a pic for you to view & it held a 1.5ct cushion, size 5.25.

     
    quaddio, rockysalamander and kipari like this.
  5. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    424
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    by Matilda » Jan 10, 2019
    I vote the thicker/more substantial setting. For above reasons, and importantly 2.3ct is significant and needs to balance with the width I think. Also you may want to ask the WF "helper", but perhaps the thicker one would prevent the ring from swinging from the weight of the diamond. I could definitely be wrong but in my head the thicker band should provide more of an anchor to the finger so it doesn't swing as much.
     
    Lykame, rockysalamander and kipari like this.
  6. ceg
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,459
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2017
    by ceg » Jan 10, 2019
    The Ritani was way too thin for me. It felt like it was from a gumball machine, no weight at all. I would be scared to have a larger diamond in it.
     
    Lykame, rockysalamander and SimoneDi like this.
  7. Dancing Fire
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    28,612
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Lykame and rockysalamander like this.
  8. stanley515
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
    by stanley515 » Jan 12, 2019
    looks like the wider band is the way to go and we'll definitely be choosing that band thank you to everyone for their advice :razz: (and saving me from myself lol, i might have chosen the thinner band without your help).
     
    SimoneDi, Lykame and Matilda like this.
  9. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    424
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    by Matilda » Jan 12, 2019
    I hope you like it! One more step closer to being engaged!!
     
    SimoneDi likes this.

Share This Page