Your Opinion? 1.53 EGL

[JulieCA]

Would you go for this stone? I feel like it''s a lot of stone for the price! I''m a little nervous about the EGL.... Any thoughts are much appreciated!!



$5698
EGL USA 2007 H&A
1.53 Ct
Color: G
Clarity: SI3
Fluorescence: Faint blue
7.42 x 7.37 x 4.60
Depth 62.2%
Table 54%
Crown Angle: 36.8
Pavilion Angle: 39.9

Here is what they say about the SI3 clarity:

The Diamond is a SI3 Clarity and is about 70% eye clean with some feathers coming from the Girdle into the Table. Under a loupe these inclusions look like two thin twining webs coming from the outer edge of the Diamond into the center of the stone but the only one that is really eye visible is located on the outer edge of the Girdle and can be hidden under a prong.

 

[Linda74]

Is the dealer very reputable and would they let you return it if the clarity is not what you are expecting? It might look more like an "I" stone in color since EGL is a little looser in grading. The cut looks very good. Here is the Holloway score based on the data you gave. . Price is certainly good if the stone looks beautiful and you like the clarity.

Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 0.9 - Excellent
within FIC range
Click here to read usage warnings and information.

 

[JulieCA]

Yes, 30 day return policy.

 

[JulieCA]

The EGL USA report for this stone has both the crown/pavilion angles and the %''s. That''s not normal right? I''ve never seen a report like this before. It also has a picture of the hearts and arrows.

Can these cut numbers be trusted?

I''m willing to take a hit on the color. It''s graded a G. The person I''ve been working with says it faces up as a G too and she says it looks very white looking because of the faint blue fluoresence. Does that square with you knowledgable folks?

Still nervous about EGL, but it has a 30 day return policy.

What do you think? Comments, criticism are appreciated!

 

[vivianv]

Not any expert but---Yes to the fluoro part.It really does help to make a stone face up whiter.Though I am not sure if faint fluoro does much. Mine is SB.

With a 30 day return policy...assuming no hidden fees...I'd have it sent out and take a look at it. Nothing to lose under those conditions but a little time.It is possible that EGL made an error and actually got one totally right!!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

70% eyeclean??!!! That is not very good! Most people would insist on 100% eyeclean unless there is just a small inclusion that can be hidden under a prong. An EGL SI3 is an I1 (or worse). Hopefully some jeweler will comment on that crown and pavilion angle...they are far from what we usually see as ideal or excellent. But no, I would rather have a smaller, better quality diamond if I were spending over $5000.

 

[Beacon]

The 70% eyeclean thing is not that good. Sounds like it will be easy to see the flaws. You might inquire if there is any structural risk to the diamond b/c of these feathers from girdle to table. I would probably pass and find something cleaner.

 

[jayreneepea]

Here are a couple of GIA graded diamonds for comparison...


http://www.exceldiamonds.com/diamond/88405.html

http://www.exceldiamonds.com/diamond/122685.html

 

[hedarud]

70% eye clean means it is not eye clean, that is like 70% not pregnant - so she is pregnant LOL

 

[vivianv]

Oops. I must have skimmed over that part about 70% eyeclean.

I am not sure I even know what they mean by 70% eyeclean. Does that mean that 30% [or almost 1/3 of the stone] is truly visibly included?? I thought EGLs SI3 grading was supposed to be for "good" -almost SI2 - I1s?? Even an I1 is not 30% visibly included is it?? This grading can be so confusing.

They wouldn''t be able to send you a macro photo of the stone would they? I''d be curious to see it.

 

[JulieCA]

Thanks for all of your input. I think I will probably pass on this one.

But, I''m going to call tomorrow and ask a little more about the SI3. She told me on the phone that there was one visible inclusion, but it could be hidden by a prong. I''ll ask for a photo and more explanation on the 70% thing.

The cut looks good on the HCA scale, but as somebody pointed out, the numbers are not as traditional as we see.

Anybody know why the EGL report is like this? I''ve never seen one like this before.