Q&A: Looking for Best Princess Cut Possible for $7000

I’m looking to buy an engagement ring online and am strongly considering purchasing through either James Allen or Blue Nile (leaning towards JA because of the pictures). I’ve really appreciated reading the advice on your website and was wondering whether you had time to give me some advice (I will make sure to use your referral code if I buy through JA).

I want to buy a princess diamond and my parameters are: square, at least 1.2-1.3 carats (but larger would be great), as good a cut as possible (have been looking mostly at Ideals/Very Good), VS2 or better for clarity, and a color (G or H?) that will look colorless to the untrained eye, but in a platinum setting (thinking about the 2.5mm comfort fit solitaire ring).

Ideally, I’d like to spend less than $7,000-$7,500 on the stone itself (or even less if possible), but can probably be flexible and of course would like to buy something nice. Please let me know if you see anything good.

So far I have liked these diamonds:

(1) 1.23 ct. G https://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1278650.asp

(2) 1.52 ct. H https://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Premium-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1314101.asp (though am worried about color and cloud in the middle)

Thank you for your time!

That does look pretty good, thanks! Do I need to be worried about the extra facet mentioned on the GIA certificate, the surface graining (also on certificate), and the girdle (is thin-to-thick & faceted a problem)? I hadn’t looked at this one as closely before because I was worried that a 1.04 ratio wouldn’t look square enough, but perhaps that is not a problem.

If I decide to spend more, what do you think of this? https://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Premium-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1346397.asp (or is the downgrade in cut very significant?)

Here’s what JA had to say below when I asked them to compare my original 1.23 ct. to the 1.24 that you recommended.

Both diamonds are eye-clean. The first one, 1278650 is nearly square. It has 4 chevrons, so 48 facets. Ideal table and depth. The second, 1260647 is has a length to width of 1.05, so not perfectly square like the first, but close. It has 3 chevrons, so 36 facets, plus one extra, or 37. Assume the extra one was required due to the shape of the rough that the diamond was cut from. I would not think this is an issue. The grading report identified surface graining. This could be noticable in a one carat, princess cut diamond especially if it is on the table. Just like wood has grain, so does a diamond. If seen, this is not desirable.
Site unseen, I would lean toward the first diamond. The squareness, the 4 chevrons versus 3, plus the surface graining issue in #2. The number of facets (chevrons in the case of a princess), influence the performance of the stone. A princess usually has 2, 3, 4, or even 5 chevrons. Some people like the bolder look of less chevrons. It is a matter of taste. Based on my own preference, I prefer the 4 chevron appearance as I think it is more traditional for a princess.

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like they actually took a look at them. I’m leaning towards the 1.23 because of the risk with the surface grain issue and don’t mind spending an extra $800 to not worry about it (and I guess I am getting a slightly better color and a squarer stone, though it probably doesn’t matter much). Hopefully the 1.23 does not look too small (she has a 8-8.5 finger size) and I hope the cut is good (parts of the picture look a little dark).

Will likely decide and place an order tomorrow – thanks for your help so far, I really appreciate it.

I did purchase that one before New Year’s, but unfortunately they came back to tell me that it was chipped and they were not able to sell it to me. So I ended up ordering this one:

https://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1346533.asp

at their recommendation. It was a little bit cheaper than this one:

https://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1260647.asp

and hopefully will be good.