Is 2 Carat Too Big?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We skipped a ring to put a down payment on a house. No regrets! I did get a spectacular ring on our 25th!

How nice for you. I got a spectacular ring and we bought a house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She had smaller hands but her fingers are a little short and chubby.

That's like me. I have a 1.5c with an interesting band.

[Anonymous]

What does she want?

Is she a "jewelry person"? If so, take a look at what she wears and take note of her taste.

[Anonymous]

^^there's also nothing wrong with ring shopping together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She had smaller hands but her fingers are a little short and chubby.

That's like me. I have a 1.5c with an interesting band.

Me too. Anything bigger would look fake.

[Anonymous]

Most quality differences can’t even be seen. Just stay away from the brick and mortar jewelry stores so you don’t get ripped off. Their certifications are mostly garbage anyway. Go blue nile or ritani that have actual certifications are usually about 50% cheaper. Aim for just under 2 carat like 1.85-1.95, sometimes the price hike is steep right over the Carat integer. No point in going higher than VS2. No double Vs!!!!! You can check out the measurements and sometimes find a diamond with a particularly large face that will look larger than it is. Anyway in brief, no, 2 carat is not too big. I am a guy btw

[Anonymous]

I have a 2ct ring. I love it, but don't wear it as often as I did when we wear first married nearly 20 years ago. I tend to just wear my eternity band now. I still love it though and wouldn't change anything about it!

[Anonymous]

OP here. I am looking on Blue Nile. I found a 1.5 ct. F, IF, and ideal cut. No fluorescence. I found a 2 ct. F, VV2, ideal cut. Faint fluorescence. Which one would be better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I am looking on Blue Nile. I found a 1.5 ct. F, IF, and ideal cut. No fluorescence. I found a 2 ct. F, VV2, ideal cut. Faint fluorescence. Which one would be better?

I would say go with a better quality diamond that is smaller than a bigger diamond that isn't the best. Both options are good but I would choose the smaller one. James Allen is good and is cheaper than Blue Nile. You may be able to find a better quality diamond that is bigger for cheaper.

[Anonymous]

My petit friend was a bit embarrassed by the (large) size of her engagement ring. So she claims it’s hard to wear in her job as a doctor and just parked it in a safety deposit box and only wears her wedding band. This is a very personal decision so make sure you know what your partner prefers. I, personally, would never want anything larger than 1.5 carats, but many would love a 2 carat diamond.

[Anonymous]

Too small...

[Anonymous]

2 ct is pretty common in my UMC circle. I would do a 2 carat as long you can get at least F color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I am looking on Blue Nile. I found a 1.5 ct. F, IF, and ideal cut. No fluorescence. I found a 2 ct. F, VV2, ideal cut. Faint fluorescence. Which one would be better?

Don’t bother with an idea cut. No one can tell. I probably would do the VV2. Much more bang for your buck. Unless it’s an emerald cut or something like that.

[Anonymous]

I've seen a lot of diamonds. Arguably the smaller one is "better" but they are both high quality stones you won't be able to tell the difference without a magnifying glass.

What does she want? Carat size is mostly what people notice. If she wants the bigger stone, get her that. If not, get the smaller one.

[Anonymous]

Some may call me a size queen but I think bigger is better!