"Av. E ring size" vs reality?

[whitby_2773]

Date: 3/21/2010 12:29:28 PM
Author: AGBF

I thought that it might be hard to picture what I described, so I am posting a picture of my engagement ring. I have always loved it although when I got interested in diamonds I did add some to my collection!

Deb/AGBF

AGBF - i LOVE this ring!! and i always appreciate what you have to say, too

DF-i dont believe a word of your 'averages'. NO area has an average of '2.6ct'! quote your source please.

gettingdesperate, i'll bet your ring is lovely i prefer smaller rings - i just like the proportions better. don't EVER take PS's 'average' as any indication of anything except PS. i come from australia and, probably like NZ, Canada, the UK, and a host of other countries, rings closer to .5ct are more the norm.

i also don't believe that the average ring size is .75ct. i've never seen a reliable stat for this average, tho plenty have tried. from reading various articles, i get the feeling that the average first engagement ring in the US is around half a carat - but smaller in virtually every other country.

as some have said, too, quality is everything. there are some big pieces of 'frozen spit' out there, and a nice .4ct would beat them hands down.

enjoy your ring; as writers, philosophers and theologians have stated down through the centuries - "Comparisons are odious."

 

[FrekeChild]

Any and all "averages/statistics" that DF posts are from his head.

 

[GettingDesperate905]

Thanks for all the replies. It''s really interesting to hear other people''s perspectives on this. I live in a nice area ($500,000+ homes) in Toronto, Canada, and the rings here are just not a reflection of the "averages" at all. I suppose maybe the big ring fever hasnt come north as much? It''s interesting how it differs so much depending on area...

 

[LilyKat]

I''m in the UK and have a "smaller" diamond at 0.75ct. This is considered absolutely HUGE here in the UK (and I''m in a major city). In fact, I''ve had a number of people ask if it''s real - not being rude, but just because they didn''t know diamonds actually came in a size above 0.25ct...

I work in a hospital and none of the female consultants (senior doctors), many of whom are in their 50s and also married to doctors, have a ring as big as mine.

I find it fascinating how there is such a strong regional difference.

 

[smiles]

Hey GD905! I also live in Toronto and I see very big differences in sizes depending where I am. Of the people in my circle ranging in age through their twenties I would say th avergage ring size is between 0.75 and just over 1 carat. That said there are quite a few girls in my class who are rencently engaged and I would say the average there is much lower (and out of the 7-8 girls only 1 of them is early 20''s the other are all mid-late twenties so it''s not necessarily an age thing). I would say at school the average is much closer to 0.5 and lower. I''d say maybe 1 or 2 girls out of the 8ish have a ring bigger than that.
That said, the adults that I know all wear their engagement rings still and they are all at least 1 carat. I would say they range from 1-1.5 carats for the centre stone.

I do think Toronto is a place where you will find that ring sizes may not match up with something like homes because homes here are generally speaking extremely expensive. 500,000 dollars for a home in the city is not unusual. In my area of the city there are like 2-3 bedroom bungalows that sell for close to 500,000 and they are not updated new homes and they are tiny!

 

[RaiKai]

The cost of living in an area is not necessarily reflective of disposable incomes available for luxury buying (like a diamond) - people can be mortgaged many times their annual income in order to have a roof over their heads and not have income to spend elsewhere (I.e.are house poor).

And practically in my experience most people around here (also in Canada) would rather spend that amount of money somewhere else then being tied up in a ring if they do have that money - myself included. My husband and I would rather enjoy or invest that kind of money together than have it sit on my finger. We are not concerned with impressing the Joneses by having bigger bling.

 

[HVVS]

This year''s "average" is my locale is .5 to .75ct at most, with RB leading princess. Upgrades are around 1.5ct. In previous years, say 2004-2008, .85ct to 1ct was typical.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/21/2010 12:58:29 PM
Author: whitby_2773

Date: 3/21/2010 12:29:28 PM
Author: AGBF

I thought that it might be hard to picture what I described, so I am posting a picture of my engagement ring. I have always loved it although when I got interested in diamonds I did add some to my collection!

Deb/AGBF

DF-i dont believe a word of your 'averages'. NO area has an average of '2.6ct'! quote your source please.

oh yeah?? Rancho Santa Fe,Ca. avg over 3 ct.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I too live in Canada. I *never* see a diamond over 1ct in my daily life, and most are probably around .5 to .75 *max*. My whopper

is 1.2ct and by far the largest one I ever see. But I live one the west coast and people don''t care so much about such things out here I think

 

[Mobinvera]

In my experience, the right size stone depends on where you live, social group, AND finger size. I''ve lived in OC and now in LA, and my 2ct solitare seems average -noticable, but not too flashy. However, when I had the center flanked by 2 side stones, it looked way too big for ME, because my hands are so small. I think if I had larger hands I could have pulled it off.