Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Wistletown back at it again...Please HELPPPPPPP

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

wistletown

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
51
What do you all think of this diamond? And how does it compare to the stone I wanted to buy.


http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00281796


Here's a link to the other ring....

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/please-help-opinion-needed-for-it-all-to-work-out-need-to-buy-before-5pm.57184/

$23,156
G color, VSI clarity
GIA certified
Comment notes NWTXXXX is engraved on the girdle
2.01 carats
table: 56.5
depth: 61.2
cutlet: none
fluorescence: none
girdle: thin to medium
cut: very good (there is a comment saying "cut grade was affecting because of brillanteering")
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Crown Angles: 34.5
Pavilion angles: 40.8
8.18mm X 8.21mm X 5.00mm


It turns out after much coaxing, the company is able to get me the canadian certificate from the merchandiser. They said it will take 2 weeks...


Which do you like better???
 

ILikeBond

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
312
Numbers are better on the second (original) stone. The bluenile one also says "not available for purchase" - what''s up with that?
 

belle

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
10,285
any chance you could see them both? i'm not loving the new one.
 

wistletown

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
51
It''s not available for purchase becuase it was placed on hold.


The first diamond is $2000+ less expensive and slightly bigger. When the proportion numbers are put into the HCA tool,

diamond #1 has a
Selected: 59.5% depth, 58% table, 32.5° crown angle, 40.8° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Excellent
Total Visual Performance 0.9 - Excellent
within TIC range

Original diamond has a
Selected: 61.2% depth, 56.5% table, 34.5° crown angle, 40.8° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.3 - Excellent
within TIC range
 

ILikeBond

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
312
Did you put it on hold? If not, no reason to bother looking into it right now, eh?


I''m surprised the bluenile stone came out so well on the HCA. Its shallower and with a bigger table than seems like is generally liked around here - much closer to a 60/60 stone. However, it does have a very good spread, will face up larger than the original stone.
 

wistletown

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
51
Yes, I have it on hold.

Will the original stone look smaller than a 2.01 then? Or you''re saying the 2.03 will actually bigger than it is...

Everyone prefers the original?
 

Kim N

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,184
Date: 2/5/2007 2:03:56 PM
Author: wistletown
Yes, I have it on hold.

Will the original stone look smaller than a 2.01 then? Or you''re saying the 2.03 will actually bigger than it is...

Everyone prefers the original?
The original stone will face up just fine. I think the 2.03 will look bigger than it actually is because of the low depth and large table. However, the diameter is not that much different from the 2.01. IMO, the original 2.01 stone has better specs, and I''d pick it over the other.
 

ILikeBond

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
312
2.01 and 2.03 aren''t very far apart - you''d expect them to face up about the same. But the bluenile is facing up at 8.21 x 8.29 x 4.91 mm, a little bigger than the 2.01. Probably not even noticeable to the eye, though - I wouldn''t go by that.

I dunno - I''m surprised the BN one came up so well on the HCA - looks like its just outside the GIA Excellent cut parameter. I''d wait for others to chime in (I''m no expert), but if the HCA is predicting a nice stone, and its a litlte bigger and a little cheaper than the other one... seems like an easy choice.

Can you get any more info from BN? An idealscope image would be most helpful.
 

wistletown

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
51
I have both stones on hold at BN. I won''t be able to get idealscopes of either stone. They just dont offer it....These are really the best stones I found for the money so far after a few months research.

The second stone is Canadian and BN will get able to get me a certificate. Someone mentioned that''s worth a 15% premium...
 

FacetFire

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
1,879
I would definitely prefer the original stone. THe new one from BN has only good polish and good symmetry. That is part of why the HCA isn''t completely accurate on that one. The HCA assumes better symmetry and polish than that. PLus, I don''t like the bigger table as much...it won''t give off as much fire. THe original seems much better...
 

wistletown

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
51
There is that little annoying comment about brillanteering with the original stone though.

All in all, is it a great stone?
 

ILikeBond

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
312
Its a dillemma. The Canadian stone seems to have slightly better numbers and is VS1 versus VS2. But its got the issue with the brillianteering/polishing, which might be a reason to pass. Assuming you''re right that the Canadian element demands a 15% premium, the non-Canadian price on this would be $20,135, less than the 2.03, even though it has higher clarity. This might indicate that its been discounted for some reason, maybe the brillianteering.

Since the difference b/tw VS1 and VS2 is negligible, since the second stone is bigger and cheaper overall but more expensive if you discount the Canadian element at 15% (possibly indicating better quality), and since the HCA has the second stone falling w/in ideal ranges even though the numbers look slightly off - I dunno, I think I''m siding with the 2.03 right now.


Does BN have a return policy? You should probably inspect either one before finally deciding whether to keep it.

Let us know what you decide, and good luck!
 

Kim N

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,184
Date: 2/5/2007 2:27:27 PM
Author: wistletown
There is that little annoying comment about brillanteering with the original stone though.

All in all, is it a great stone?
I don''t mind a little brillanteering/painting at all. Whiteflash''s New Line stones are cut with a little bit of painting.

All in all, I think it''s a great stone. Blue Nile has a 30-day return policy. If I were in your place, I''d get the original stone and use the return period to see if you like the diamond.
 

ILikeBond

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
312
Re, the painting - see the third post down here. Seems like a thoughtful discussion of the issue, which might help you decide.
 

JulieN

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
13,324
Original sounds good to me. the problem is that there's no clear winner unless you can get some pictures.
 
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!
    Handmade diamond studs
    Handmade diamond studs
    5 Diamond Misconceptions: Part 1
    5 Diamond Misconceptions: Part 1
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade

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