(Closed) Would you rather pay $50 for a zircon ring or $100 for a diamond ring?

posted 4 years ago in Rings
Post # 2
Member
8938 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper

View original reply
moomooskitten:  Zircon, or cubic zirconia? They’re different. If it’s zircon, a $50 zircon is probably going to be prettier than a $100 diamond, so I’d take the zircon. If you’re talking CZ though, and this is an engagement ring, I’d take the diamond because I prefer natural stones. So even though the diamond isn’t going to be sparkly, I’d probably still prefer it.

Post # 3
Member
3896 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: April 2016 - Manhattan, NY

View original reply
moomooskitten:  I’ve never heard of zircon before. Honestly, if the objective is to save money, then I would go with whatever is more attractive ex. if one shines more brilliantly than the other. My preference would be a diamond over zircon under normal circumstances.

Post # 4
Member
3322 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: City, State

View original reply
moomooskitten:  I would have said diamond but I am a recent moissanite convert. If its a cubic zirconia then it will scuff up easy  and quickly. Giving the stone a rough talc like appearance. If its a zircon and you want shine, this is a good stone for that over a low grade diamond. If you want a diamond ring, then its worth paying the extra £50 as a diamond can last a lifetime. 

Also think about if you will upgrade or change it. If not then the diamond 

However if your going to swap it in a few years then you can save £50 and get the zircon. 

 

Post # 5
Member
3163 posts
Sugar bee

Zircon are beautiful and they sparkle like a diamond.  can you post pictures so we can see? 

Post # 6
Member
893 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2013

natural white zircon (clear) is beautful but as soft as CZ. Its a great alternative to CZ if you want a natural stone. I personally would have to see both rings to ake a decision.

Post # 7
Member
6864 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: February 1997

I agree about seeing both rings. A $100 diamond ring is likely to be poor quality (low in colour and highly included), but a zircon ring does not have the durability to last. I’m not sure I’d want to pay $50 for a ring I will have to replace in a few years or pay $100 for duller stones, so I’d see what the budget could accommodate and get a nicer quality diamond.

Post # 8
Member
1837 posts
Buzzing bee

View original reply
Daisy_Mae:  Exactly … zircon or cz? Because a zircon could be gorgeous, a cz not so much. 

Post # 9
Member
4238 posts
Honey bee

View original reply
moomooskitten:  

I agree that we need more info. I might favor the white zircon but I’d need to see them or know more. Having said that, I’ve got some sterling silver and CZ rings that are 25-30yrs old. That’s a pretty good run for any of my “non-forever rings”, don’t you think?

 

Post # 10
Member
3307 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: November 1999

Zircons are beautiful, but they suffer because their name sounds like a diamond stimulant. Let me just say that any ring with diamonds that costs only $100 is not worth it. 

Post # 11
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2012

I’d pick the one that looks prettier! 

Post # 12
Member
4238 posts
Honey bee

View original reply
doberman:  

Retail? Maybe. 2nd hand? $100 could buy a dream deal from a motivated seller.

 

 

Post # 13
Member
333 posts
Helper bee

If you want a stone to last forever and you are actually talking cz then I would say diamond, because I want  stone I never have to replce.  It is sentimental.  That being said, I chose a moissy myself.  It is a forever stone and I liked the sparkle. 

Post # 14
Member
3287 posts
Sugar bee

If it is natural Zircon and not CZ go for the Zircon. 

 

The topic ‘Would you rather pay $50 for a zircon ring or $100 for a diamond ring?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors