What is correct Size for Side Trillions?

[scfuller2004]

I have a 3.02 emerald cut stone. It''s nearly a Square Emerald cut stone, as the L/W ratio is 1.06. The side of the stone at which point trillions would be mounted, measures just over 5 mm. How many points would each side trillion be for a ring? I was told about .25 carats for each stone, or .50 carats total weight? But that seems so small relative to the center stone. Can someone help?

 

[valeria101]

It's not the weight of the sides, but their size that matters. The trillions are much less deep cut than the EC, so, at small weight the guys look BIG. As a rule of thumb, the side trillions can have the sides a tad smaller than the side of the center stone, 'cause there should be room left for the prongs holding the side.

If the side of the center is a tad over 5mm, you would need sides with a 4mm size or at most very slightly more. For a trillion of decent cut, this is tiny: less than 0.3cts.

Just one Q though: how come a 3cts square EC has a side of 5mm ??? It should be 120% deep or so ! Typo

 

[scfuller2004]

i agree. you need room for the prongs. do you know what would translate into carat weight for a trillion that measured 5 mm across at the point it would meet the center stone? my diamond measures8.80 x 8.26 x 5.05 mm

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/31/2004 12:48:21 PM scfuller2004 wrote:

i agree. you need room for the prongs. do you know what would translate into carat weight for a trillion that measured 5 mm across at the point it would meet the center stone? my diamond measures8.80 x 8.26 x 5.05 mm----------------

Oh... so do you want the trillions smaller than the side of the diamond? With 8.8 the side of the center, the side of the trillion could wel be 7mm.

There is a little rule of thumb for trills: the side would be about as big as the diameter of a round 1.4 times the weight. Very approximate. One would need the depth of the trillion to calculate a weight for the size.
Can't find the formula on my computer... I will try to get it if no one chims in.

 

[scfuller2004]

my jeweler told me that 5 mm across would be max for the trillions. And i looked at a pair yesterday, weighing just over 50 points in total. they looked so small..i really want some decently sized side stones, since my center stone is fairly large.

 

[roshita]

A nice look aesthetically would be to get trillions that measures the same as the side of your emerald cut to 3/4 of of your center diamond. Your personal preferance on how it looks is the true measure. Choose the look that makes you the happiest.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/31/2004 1:25:49 PM scfuller2004 wrote:

my jeweler told me that 5 mm across would be max for the trillions. And i looked at a pair yesterday, weighing just over 50 points in total. they looked so small..i really want some decently sized side stones, since my center stone is fairly large. ----------------

This may be what the planned setting style allows. There must be other options and there are many more options for the type of sidestones.

Take a look on this page for a couple of options. Also, among their rings there are quite a few with farely large trillions.

Hope this helps

 

[scfuller2004]

many thanks!

i've been told from my jeweler that price of platinum has gone up.
he's quoted me about $2,000 for a platinum setting. Does that seem high?
Also, his trillions E-F in color are about $1,700 for the pair, weighing just over 50 points total. what do you think of that price?

 

[valeria101]

Setting.. whatever. This is not out of line with what a very nice hand made three-stone ring would take. I do not understant though why a fully custom-made work has to come with restrictions on the size of the sides. What kind of setting is it? Blaiming the price of plat for this isounds strange: you do pay for the work, not the metal in this project. High quality setting is not the cheapest part of ring-making, quite the opposite.

But the trillions... ouch! They better be perfectly cut and flawless for the money. A F-VS pair could be 1k and E/F-SI $600 or so for the weight. I hope I am not dreaming... There could be a good reason for the rest though: it may be a big % but not too much money afterwards.

 

[scfuller2004]

yeah, i thought that was high..
so you're saying that for 50 points total weight, E-F color, (not sure of the clarity, but they are at least SI1, probably better), that they should be in the $1,000 range?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/31/2004 2:36:46 PM scfuller2004 wrote:

yeah, i thought that was high..
so you're saying that for 50 points total weight, E-F color, (not sure of the clarity, but they are at least SI1, probably better), that they should be in the $1,000 range?----------------

Yes. Actually, up to 1k.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Here's an important point I believe has been skipped over:


Trilliants are brilliant faceted. Putting such stones next to a step cut emerald may NOT give you the result you're looking for.


The contrast between sparkling side stones and a glittring center may take the eye away from the star of the show.






Valeria also brings up another good point- if their $2000 custom made platinum ring can only take certain sizes, it sounds more like something made from non custom made parts. They are charging $1700 for a pair of 1/2ct trills ( Definately on the high side- even for a B/M) - by the same benchmark a fine custom made platinum ring would be quite a bit more than $2k- this leads me to believe that the ring they are offering is NOT a true custom made piece.




Add this to a potentially questionable side stone selction and you could be throwing good mony after bad.