Picking a classic engagement ring from Blue Nile – opinions/show me your pics

panpan

I’ve been looking for an engagement ring for my girlfriend. I’ve visited Hatton Garden (Jewlery centre in London) and looked extensivly online.

Blue Nile is so far my prefered choice (I’ve heard good things) and I have looked through their rings.

I’m looking for a solitaire platinum ring, I’m going for a ‘classic look’. I’ve got my choice down to a few settings (I would post links but it wont let me - would be grateful if you could search blue nile for the following)

Classic Four Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring

Petite Solitaire Engagement Ring

Classic Six Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring

Petite Nouveau Six Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring


I have three questions:

1. Four or six claws – I’ve looked at various posts about this, four claws shows the diamond off more but they offer less protection if a claw were to break. Four claw also sort of squares off the diamond. Six claws offer more protection and gives a more solitaire shape, but can overcrowd the stone.What are your thoughts on this? I was thinking about going for a 0.4 crt to a 0.6 crt, do you think a six claw would overwhelm the stone, is it best to stick with a four claw so the stone looks larger?

2. Does anyone have any pics of the any of the above rings? On blue nile I can only see showroom pics would love to see them in real world settings.

3. Does anyone have any opinions on the above rings that could help me chose?

silvercar

Classic Four Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring

Petite Solitaire Engagement Ring

Classic Six Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring

Petite Nouveau Six Claw Solitaire Engagement Ring

Ignore the prices as some are set in white gold and some in platinum.

silvercar

Generally 4 claws will make it look more square. 6 claws will offer more protection, but usually smaller stones only have 4 claws otherwise the diamond is too small compared to the claws.

Personally I prefer the look of 6 claws, as it enhances the circular nature of the top flat surface of the diamond. You can also choose between the 6 claws being in the classic position where 2 of the claws are in a vertical line or whether to have 2 claws in line with the band, making them slightly less noticable.

My engagement ring was originally 6 claws, about 15 years ago I had it reset in a rubbed over setting, something like this bezel setting but the diamond set as high as it would be in a claw setting.

The main reason was the annoyance of fluff etc catching in the claws, so I went for the other extreme.

tea_lover

I wouldn't go for a claw setting at all.

SavingPennies_2

I prefer the one below (first link) simple and classy but a bit different to the usual claw setting. However you aren't proposing to me so my opinion doesnt count, so I'd get a nice cheap ring (like link 2 below) to propose, then choose the real one together.

http://pics.bluenile.com/byor/product_details.html?offer_id=48187&forceStep=STYLE_STEP&diamond_shape=


http://www.hsamuel.co.uk/webstore/d/1362097/sterling+silver+zirconia+solitaire+%26+hearts+ring+-+size+n/

cashewnut

You can get four claws in a 'compass' setting to make the stone more round

ripplyuk

I'd also avoid anything with claws. Totally impractical. I got one as a gift from my grandmother some years back and it's a torture for catching on clothes all the time, and it's likely to break one of the claws at some stage. It's ended up that I never wear it. It just sits in my jewellery box.

I think the bezel setting ring in the link above from silvercar is absolutely beautiful. That's what I'd want

InsideInsurance

Mrs has a 4 claw ring from Blue Nile but then with an emerald cut stone the "squaring off" is a non-issue.

Hers is 6 years old now and worn almost daily and personally hasnt had any issues either with the claws being bent/damaged nor it catching on clothing etc. She does have two cocktail rings that are somewhat similar but much larger stone (aquamarine & amethyst ) and the claws of the aquamarine ones do catch occasionally on jumpers etc but the other doesnt. Clearly it does vary a little on the design (though the aquamarine was a "bespoke" made thing to copy the amethyst ring just with the different stone).

Personally, assuming your fiancee to be doesnt have absolutely tiny hands and with a ~0.5c stone I would probably more be looking at a 4 claw to maximise what you get from the stone. If it was a significantly bigger stone then the loss from the extra claws or a bezel would be less

Whatever you go for, ensure the home insurance covers it appropriately

totallybored

panpan wrote: »

3. Does anyone have any opinions on the above rings that could help me chose?

How about your girlfriend's opinion rather than strangers on the Internet? She's the one who will have to wear it every day so why not allow her to have some input into the decision.

LilElvis

Another vote for no claws. A demi-bezel looks nice, and doesn't obscure too much of the stone.

The link below is for the wedding band, but shows it with the demi-bezel solitaire. I've got this design in a 3 diamond dress ring (·25 radiant blue and 2 x ·15 regular diamonds) had it 14 years with no catching on clothes and no loosening of the stones. I actually couldn't praise this jeweller enough - not cheap, but his workmanship is exceptional and I personally love his designs. He made my engagement and wedding band too - next commission will be an eternity ring.

http://simonpure.co.uk/rings/wr1-2-5-pure-set-fitted-wedding-band.html

InsideInsurance

totallybored wrote: »

How about your girlfriend's opinion rather than strangers on the Internet? She's the one who will have to wear it every day so why not allow her to have some input into the decision.

Unless she is like my Mrs who had always said it was the guys job to pick it and surprise her with it at the proposal. Makes getting her opinion much more tricky.