1914 Halfcrowns

[Nonmortuus 848]

I have been looking to upgrade my 1914 Halfcrown for a while but every example I find has wear on the upper ear/its not fully formed. Looking at the CGS population report even the top graded 1914 Halfcrown they have on record (CGS 82 UIN 37819) has this issue. Is this a common thing with how 1914's were minted or are there examples of this date with the ear fully formed and in near perfect condition?

[ozjohn 552]

What you see is normal for KGV halfcrowns of this period. With the example shown I'm not too keen on the scratches between the beard and end of the truncated neck or the

small edge knocks at 6 o' clock and 7 o' clock to attract such a high grading..

As to wear if you look on the rim of the coin from about 12 o' clock to 2 o' clock you will see a raised portion of thin metal following the rim of the coin. If there had been any

wear I think this portion would have worn quicker than the top of the ear indicating that the flatness on the top of the ear is probably due to the striking rather than wear.

As an aside I think the milling of the coin is not given the attention it deserves when grading coins.

[Nonmortuus 848]

4 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

What you see is normal for KGV halfcrowns of this period.

Thanks for the reply John, what time span does 'this period' refer to? Just 1914? 1911 through to 1919? I ask as the ear on my 1919 is pretty well struck up and the 15, and 16's are not as bad as the 14 above.

[VickySilver 775]

Brow ridge and hair detail not to keen on this one and like the points introduced IMO are a result of soft strike/worn dies. Although these are common malady issues for the war years primarily 1914-18 some specimens can be found that have surprisingly few. CGS does seem to have been a bit lenient on this one. Technical grading, BTW, would not "hit" a coins numerical grade for soft strike as that would be how it left the dies. So-called "market grading" would of course ding the numerical grade for soft strike; one problem is that there is year to year variance, and even likely die variance between coins.

[ozjohn 552]

Then the RM changed the alloy and the strike quality went from bad to worse until the introduction of the modified effigy coins of 1926. Grading  George V silver has always been difficult. I have several halfcrowns I have collected along the way that appear "flat" on the ear, beard, eyebrow etc. and the top of the shield on the reverse and graded accordingly but until you examine the milling which can be pristine you realize you have been mistaken and you realize you have under graded the coin. If you are going for a type collection probably better to buy a 1911 proof.

[Paulus 1,942]

For my type collection I am aiming to have both a proof example (where applicable) and a 'standard' example for each design, as I regard proofs and 'circulation' coins as different types.

I have a very acceptable (CGS 92) 1911 proof half crown, but still struggling to find a circulating half crown 1911-19 with my 'target' strike/grade/eye appeal/price combination 

Edited April 28, 2016 by Paulus

[Nonmortuus 848]

1 hour ago, ozjohn said:

If you are going for a type collection probably better to buy a 1911 proof.

I am trying to complete a date run of George V Halfcrowns, missing the two hard ones to get at the moment in a 25 and 30 but I have other dates I want to upgrade like my 1914