last silver crown

[craigy 362]

you might have seen this on the aquisition of the week thread, beautiful 1937 proof crown,   i love it,    have now worked out what i'm going to collect, has to be the early cameo looking proofs, did they have the cameo look on any George V ? i have 2 of these now, some proofs seem frosted and others dont, 

[Sword 1,330]

10 minutes ago, craigy said:

you might have seen this on the aquisition of the week thread, beautiful 1937 proof crown,   i love it,    have now worked out what i'm going to collect, has to be the early cameo looking proofs, did they have the cameo look on any George V ? i have 2 of these now, some proofs seem frosted and others dont, 

 

The 1935 Raised Edge Proof crowns are generally frosted (but I have read this is not always the case for the later struck examples). The wreath crowns are generally not frosted but Vicky Silver have posted one with minimal frosting. 

[Sword 1,330]

My own examples:

1927 proof crown with no frosting

 

1935 RE crown with frosting (but the mirrored surfaces have toned making this less obvious)

[craigy 362]

2 minutes ago, Sword said:

My own examples:

1927 proof crown with no frosting

 

1935 RE crown with frosting (but the mirrored surfaces have toned making this less obvious)

could some of the appearance of frosting be due to toning on these coins,  because i have another 37 with frosted bust and the mirrored fields have gone like your 27 ? ?     nice coins btw, still have not got the 27 crown,  cant justify the money when so many are on sale if you get what i mean

 

Edited August 14, 2017 by craigy

[Sword 1,330]

3 minutes ago, craigy said:

could some of the appearance of frosting be due to toning on these coins,  ?     nice coins btw, still have not got the 27 crown,  cant justify the money when so many are on sale if you get what i mean

 

No, frosting is the norm for 1935 RE proof crowns. This example (sold by LCA) shows it very nicely.

[craigy 362]

6 minutes ago, Sword said:

No, frosting is the norm for 1935 RE proof crowns. This example (sold by LCA) shows it very nicely.

thats nice, love that 35 crown, the design on the reverse looks very art deco if you get the lines and that on the dragon, defo on my wants list, wonder how far back we can go finding the frosted look, 

Edited August 14, 2017 by craigy

[rpeddie 119]

bout this one (1774) 

•  
•  

[Paulus 1,942]

3 hours ago, craigy said:

you might have seen this on the aquisition of the week thread, beautiful 1937 proof crown,   i love it,    have now worked out what i'm going to collect, has to be the early cameo looking proofs, did they have the cameo look on any George V ? i have 2 of these now, some proofs seem frosted and others dont, 

My example 

[VickySilver 775]

Your 1937 is quite pleasant and although hairlines can be obscured by photos, appears to be a very nice Cameo example with nicely frosted devices!  

Even the 1927 Wreath with frosting is likely quite hard to find. My best is the 1936. The later dates in proof quite expensive and some of the proofs are likely not proof strikes but rather ProofLike - neither do these have cameo effect. 

[Gary D 76]

Of course the 1937 is not silver but Cup0oNickel. The later E11 decimal silver proof crowns show nice frosting.

[craigy 362]

13 minutes ago, Gary D said:

Of course the 1937 is not silver but Cup0oNickel. The later E11 decimal silver proof crowns show nice frosting.

the 37 crown is .500 silver 

[craigy 362]

11 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Your 1937 is quite pleasant and although hairlines can be obscured by photos, appears to be a very nice Cameo example with nicely frosted devices!  

Even the 1927 Wreath with frosting is likely quite hard to find. My best is the 1936. The later dates in proof quite expensive and some of the proofs are likely not proof strikes but rather ProofLike - neither do these have cameo effect. 

do you have any proofs from any of the non standard proof set years ? 

[Gary D 76]

4 minutes ago, craigy said:

the 37 crown is .500 silver 

your right my bad. it was 47 when they went to cupro nickel. The VIP was available in sterling silver.

[craigy 362]

7 minutes ago, Gary D said:

your right my bad. it was 47 when they went to cupro nickel. The VIP was available in sterling silver.

wonder if you can tell the difference between the half silver and the full silver ?    i'm just delving into the finer points of these vip and frosty looking coins 

[Gary D 76]

The only non destructive way I know of but still takes care is to ring them, easier to tell if you have one of each. I have both a 1935 raised edge proof (sterling silver) and 1935 proof (0.500 silver). If you carefully balance one and tap with a pencil the 0.95 silver has a lower tone.

[Paulus 1,942]

50 minutes ago, Gary D said:

The only non destructive way I know of but still takes care is to ring them, easier to tell if you have one of each. I have both a 1935 raised edge proof (sterling silver) and 1935 proof (0.500 silver). If you carefully balance one and tap with a pencil the 0.95 silver has a lower tone.

I am surprised they are exactly the same weight?

 

[Sword 1,330]

13 minutes ago, Paulus said:

I am surprised they are exactly the same weight?

 

Sterling silver and 0.5 silver don't have the same density  (0.5 silver is less dense). Assuming they have the same weight, then the diameter and /or thickness must be different. 

I remember trying to put a currency 1935 crown into a proof crown box and it didn't fit. The hole was too small for the currency crown.

[Paulus 1,942]

Just now, Sword said:

Sterling silver and 0.5 silver don't have the same density  (0.5 silver is less dense). Assuming they have the same weight, then the diameter and /or thickness must be different. 

I remember trying to put a currency 1935 crown into a proof crown box and it didn't fit. The hole was too small for the currency crown.

Hense my surprise ... that would explain it, although I am surprised they varied the diameter instead of the weight!!!

[Sword 1,330]

Just now, Paulus said:

Hense my surprise ... that would explain it, although I am surprised they varied the diameter instead of the weight!!!

I would imagine that weight has historically been more important than diameter when it comes to coins?

[Paulus 1,942]

Just now, Sword said:

I would imagine that weight has historically been more important than diameter when it comes to coins?

It was when the value of the metal content was equivalent to the FV of the coin, but I don't believe that was the case come 1935? Much more work involved in changing the size of the coin (I would have thought!)

Finding this a little surprising I must say!

[Sword 1,330]

6 hours ago, craigy said:

do you have any proofs from any of the non standard proof set years ? 

Some were posted here previously

http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/7018-crowns/?page=21

 

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, as was said before, IMO many sold and even slabbed as proof are not. I have a 1931 currency that is the equal of many of the proofs. I think the slabs protect the coin reasonably but not always sure you can go by the TPG assigned grade number. A bit of a Rob conspiracy theorist here, but I believe who the submitter was and the size of the submission help to decide on grades !  I'll eat my hat if the 36 is only a "65" or the 34 is only a "64"...

[Peckris 579]

You will find it's completely a matter of chance whether you get frosting on 20th Century proofs before 1980,, with a few exceptions. I'm not sure why it's so variable though.

[Gary D 76]

My 1937 Crown, PCGS 67 top pop.

[craigy 362]

On 8/19/2017 at 11:15 AM, Gary D said:

My 1937 Crown, PCGS 67 top pop.

thats a tidy looking coin matem