DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cubic Zirconia: Pros & Cons

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows is the T73 round brilliant with eight narrow crack facets polished onto the pavilion, one on each ridge where two lower girdle halves meet between the mains: 81 facets against the T73's 73. They are tiny, about 0.1 mm wide on a 6.5 mm stone, and the rest of our model keeps the T73's measure: 40.75° pavilion mains and 61.7% depth, under a 53.0% table and a 34.5° crown.

The cut was drawn for diamond. There, in our simulated Hearts and Arrows viewer, a thin straight line splits each of the eight hearts down its middle, and that is where the name comes from. In CZ the hearts do not form in that viewer. So this page is about light: the CZ set against the T73 in the same stone, and against the same cut in diamond.

Against the T73 in CZ, light, fire and Tilt all sit level by our margins, and the leakage shares in our tilted maps match to within a point at every angle. Against the diamond version, CZ gains fire and light and gives up some steadiness when tipped.

Is DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows right for CZ? Pros and cons

Pros

More fire than the diamond version 85 vs 78
More light than the same cut in diamond 99 vs 94

Cons

Far heavier than a diamond of the same size 1.66 vs 1.01 ct
Less steady than the diamond version when tipped 88 vs 92

Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in cubic zirconia and with the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond. A difference counts from 3 points (Brilliance, Fire, Tilt, Leakage), 5 (Scintillation, Symmetry), 4% (face-up size per carat) or 5% (weight); Tilt counts as a pro only for a stone within 5 points of the brilliance it is compared with. How we measure.

All eight scores against the T73

At a glance: the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in cubic zirconia (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in cubic zirconia (dashed): solid white where it reaches further, hatched where it falls short. Each pro and con is explained, with pictures, below.

Against the T73 Round Brilliant in cubic zirconia: ahead on 3, level on 4, behind on 1.

Global93, the comparison 93, difference 0
Brilliance99, the comparison 98, difference +1
Fire85, the comparison 87, difference −2
Scintillation83, the comparison 80, difference +3
Spread100, the comparison 100, difference 0
Symmetry100, the comparison 100, difference 0
Shape-norm106, the comparison 106, difference 0
Tilt88, the comparison 87, difference +1

Face-up light census, a different measure from the Cut Grading Tool; Spread and Shape-norm above 100 sit on the ring. Spread is the census's estimate from depth alone; the face-up size in the pros and cons is measured from each model's outline.

Open it in the Cut Performance Wheel

What DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows gives cubic zirconia

More fire than the diamond version

Fire 85 against 78 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 7 points higher

The facets are identical in both stones, so the gap comes with the material: CZ spreads light into colour more strongly, with a dispersion of 0.060 against diamond's 0.044. Set against the T73 in CZ there is no gain, 85 against 87, which our margins call level.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in cubic zirconia face-up under a single bright light: a render from our simulator, its coloured flashes are the fire (score 85) — Look at the coloured flashes: those are fire. Same light, same size, same face-up angle; rendered by our 3D Gemstone Simulator from each cut's own model.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in diamond face-up under a single bright light: a render from our simulator, its coloured flashes are the fire (score 78) — Look at the coloured flashes: those are fire. Same light, same size, same face-up angle; rendered by our 3D Gemstone Simulator from each cut's own model.

Try it yourself: See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator

More light than the same cut in diamond

Brilliance 99 against 94 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 5 points higher

Head-on, the CZ Light Return map shows no grey, while the diamond map loses a little, mostly at the rim. Over the wider cone the census averages, CZ stays ahead, and among the cuts we measure in this stone only DG-Rafaello scores higher.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in cubic zirconia face-up Light Return map: red, green and blue show where the light returns from, grey shows where it leaks (Brilliance 99) — Red, green and blue = light returning to the eye; grey = light leaving through the pavilion. This is the head-on view; the Brilliance score averages a wider cone of light, so the score can differ from what one picture shows.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in diamond face-up Light Return map: red, green and blue show where the light returns from, grey shows where it leaks (Brilliance 94) — Red, green and blue = light returning to the eye; grey = light leaving through the pavilion. This is the head-on view; the Brilliance score averages a wider cone of light, so the score can differ from what one picture shows.

Try it yourself: Open this Light Return map in the simulator

Where this cut gives ground in CZ

Far heavier than a diamond of the same size

1.66 ct at 6.5 mm, against 1.01 ct for the same cut in diamond (+65%)

The crack facets have no part in this. CZ's specific gravity is about 5.8 against diamond's 3.52, so a 6.5 mm stone comes to 1.66 ct here and 1.01 ct in diamond.

A DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows 6.5 mm across, weighed from the model's measured volume and each stone's specific gravity.

What helps: Order it in millimetres, as with any CZ.

Try it yourself: Weights in all seven gemstones on the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows page

Less steady than the diamond version when tipped

Tilt 88 against 92 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 4 points lower

In the strips the CZ starts cleaner, the two stay close through 20°, and by 30° the CZ map carries clearly more grey. Against the T73 in CZ it gives nothing away, 88 against 87. Diamond's higher refractive index keeps more steeply slanting light inside.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in cubic zirconia tilted 0 degrees: Light Return map, 0% of the face leaking — Tilt is how much of its own face-up light a stone keeps when tilted. Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; grey is light leaving through the pavilion. The share under each frame is that picture's own.

Dg-broken hearts and arrows in cubic zirconia tilted 10 degrees: Light Return map, 1% of the face leaking — Tilt is how much of its own face-up light a stone keeps when tilted. Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; grey is light leaving through the pavilion. The share under each frame is that picture's own.

What helps: Of the CZ rounds returning 97 or more, DG-Miliano Cubic Zirconia stays steadiest when tipped, at 90. The Old European Cut Cubic Zirconia reaches 91 with less light, 92.

Try it yourself: Compare the Tilt spoke in the Cut Performance Wheel

Who a DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows CZ suits

In CZ this is a T73 with eight extra pavilion facets, and it scores like one: light, fire and scintillation level with the T73 by our margins, and almost no leakage. Choose it to cut the same file you mean to cut in diamond, and to rehearse the crack facets before cutting a diamond.

Do not choose it in CZ for the broken hearts: that pattern is diamond's, on DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Diamond. For the most light in CZ, DG-Rafaello Cubic Zirconia (100); for finer sparkle at the T73's light, DG-Vitruvio Cubic Zirconia (98 for scintillation); for more fire in a round, DG-Miliano Cubic Zirconia (90).

The crack facets go on last, about 0.007 mm deep on a 6.5 mm stone, and CZ polishes readily, which makes it a fair stone to practise placing facets that shallow.

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cubic Zirconia: questions

Do the hearts show in a DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows CZ?

Not in our simulated Hearts and Arrows viewer: in CZ the hearts do not form, split or whole. The split hearts are a diamond pattern.

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows or T73 for cubic zirconia?

Very close: Brilliance 99 against 98, Fire 85 against 87, Tilt 88 against 87 and Scintillation 83 against 80. By our margins all four are level, eight extra facets or not.

Does DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows leak light in CZ?

Almost none: 0% in our census, against 1% for the T73 and 0% for DG-Rafaello: level by our margins.

What does a 6.5 mm DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows CZ weigh?

1.66 ct; cut in diamond, the same stone is 1.01 ct.

Get the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut files

6 formatsMillimetresWatertight

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut 3D files

The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut as exact geometry: 81 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD, rendering, printing and casting.

STEPExact faceted solid for CAD
3DMRhino, closed mesh on its own layer
STLWatertight mesh for printing and casting
OBJMesh for modelling and rendering
FBXBlender, 3ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, Unity, Unreal
GLBWeb, AR and quick previews

€9.99 · Personal useBuy the 3D files

GemCad96 index

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut cutting files

The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut as a faceting design: 65 + 16 girdles = 81 facets, 96 index, 8-fold mirror-image symmetry, ready for the machine.

.ascGemCad design file, 96 index gear
.csvTier table: angles, indices and cutting order
DiagramPrintable faceting diagram

€9.99 · Personal useBuy the cutting files

Questions before you buy? Email us.

More gemstones and cuts

Cubic Zirconia: optical properties and the top ten cuts · The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows: specifications, model and files

DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cubic Zirconia: more fire than in diamond, and second only to DG-Rafaello for light