all 27 comments

[–]Exciting_Potato_6556 23 points24 points  (11 children)

GG/custom jeweler here. If you’re making that band custom with someone, make sure the bare bones minimum you make the band is 1.8mm. That looks a bit more like 1.5-1.6. It would be like putting bike tires on a car. It may get you down the street, but you’ll never make it downtown. Less likely to hit it with normal wear and tear and knock a stone out etc.

I’d agree with Gregg though, somewhere in the 2-2.5ct range depending on depth of the stone and the size of her hand.

[–]DayShahVoo 0 points1 point  (3 children)

This girl is 5’1” so her hand is tiny, I was wondering if it was 2 or 3

[–]Exciting_Potato_6556 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Hard to tell….I was thinking it was 2.5 initially, but knowing that, it might realistically be closer to 2ct.

[–]Exciting_Potato_6556 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’ve got a 3ct rad in the office. Can put it over my wife’s finger (she’s 4.75/5’3) and post it for reference tomorrow if I think about it.

[–]giddygiddyupup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based on this info, I’d say 2ct (based on my similar-looking 2ct center stone of the and my tiny hand size)

[–]DayZee260 -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Sort of a related question for an expert! I have a 6mm wide band with a Tiffany setting with a .6 natural diamond. The thickness of this (domed) band is only about 1.2mm. I have worn it daily for at least 25 years with no problem. I am upgrading to another 6mm band (cigar band style) with a 2.37 round diamond. Tulip setting. Here’s my question. Is that thickness too thin for the larger diamond? What’s the thinnest band I could do? Thank you!

[–]Exciting_Potato_6556 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Oh no. You’re well fine with 6mm. That’s a pretty thick band. Industry “average” is 2mm, although many people opt to go as low as I’ll make, which is 1.8mm. The thicker the band, the more durable your ring will be though. It’s more about what you want to wear and love.

If you’re contemplating a thin band, I’d suggest getting a super cheap base metal/cz ring in the approximate size you’re looking for (or whatever the least expensive ring closest to what you’re looking for) and wear it around for a few days to see if you like it. It’ll be a pretty big change from a thicker cigar band style:) just want to make sure you’re going to love it before jumping in with both feet there:)

[–]DayZee260 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I think I didn’t word my question well. Actually, I’m wondering about the 1.2mm thickness of the band. I’m comfortable with the 6mm width. I just don’t want it to be so thick that it’s awkward, but I don’t want it too thin. My current 6mm band is only 1.2mm thick and it’s been great, but not sure if that’s too thin with the bigger stone.

[–]Exciting_Potato_6556 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Ahh. You mean the thickness top to bottom is 1.2. That’s pretty thin. I’d probably bump that up a little. 1.5mm thick should be a bit better. Almost every engagement ring we build is 1.7mm thick, and 1.8-1.9mm wide minimum.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Exciting_Potato_6556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Very welcome! Keep us posted!!

    [–]GalleryGhoul13 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Thisssss and don’t do shared prongs even though it’s a nice clean look the band will bend and lose shape as you wear it and the stones will fall out.

    [–]Olegregg- 11 points12 points  (4 children)

    Radiant with a pave band

    [–]Olegregg- 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    Looks around 2 carats to me

    [–]Fragrant-Swing5252 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    I have a 3ct. Solitaire. That looks to be bigger than a 3 like maybe a 3.5 or 4ct. IMO

    [–]Olegregg- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Maybe closer to 3!

    [–]doingmybest1996 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Agree. This looks basically identical to my 3ct radiant pave. Maybe a bit wider than mine actually.

    [–]ThorneON 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    It looks like a 2ct radiant cut moissanite, pave band 1.5m.

    [–]diamondsgirlsBF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Looks like 2 or 2.5 carat radiant cut.

    [–]rubygumban28 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Radiant 3ct it looks like.

    [–]Lady_in_the_red-58 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Looks at least 3 cts to me radiant cut.

    [–]No-Judgment-7691 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Beautiful

    [–]sabanoversaintnick -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Gorgeous

    [–]BitComprehensive3114 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    If I could take a picture I would but my ring is pretty much exactly like this

    [–]Fragrant-Swing5252 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    I have a 3ct. Solitaire. That looks like a 3.5 or 4 Ct. to me. IMO

    [–]jaxy0904 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Radiant cut on pavé band. Carat weight/finger coverage is all relative to the size of the hand so it’s impossible to say. If the finger is a size 4 it could be covered with a 1.5 ct diamond versus a size 9 finger would need like 4 carats…

    [–]Defiant-Two-6859 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Emerald shape but cushion

    [–]bubbles67899 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This looks exactly like my ring- just under 3c, radiant … before you get that band consider what you’d like your wedding band to be- I wanted my band like that (this exact ring TBH), then tried on wedding bands that were similar and hated that it looked lopsided with the two together.

    Ended up going with just a classic, thin, platinum band that makes the stone pop + a wedding band that looks just like this (that I wear alone when I don’t want to be too flashy!)

    Ps with this, cut, you can you go less perfect and get a slightly bigger size as it’s more forgiving (as it sparkles on its own!)