Leaderboard

MS is MS, MS 60 is an un-circulated coin. Higher grades are more subjective with MS61 and higher attention is paid to strike, bag knocks, luster. toning etc. Wear and poor strike being very difficult to distinguish when it is slight. Also attention should be paid to the condition of the milling of the coin edge The whole point of TPG is consistency for valuation and comparing coins. The subject coin from the photo shows slight wear on the higher points and more correctly graded AU 55 - 58 or EF IMO. Personally I prefer the Sheldon as it gets rid of the abt. nearly + etc that are much more subjective. However it must be applied accurately to be of use. Having said that the book The Standard Guide to Grading British Coins is a good guide

I see your point. The designs of modern coinage, including pre-decimal QE2 as here, are low relief to prolong the die life, almost 2-D with negligible depth, and thus it might not need much acid dunking to erode any shallow raised detail, if it were treated so. As the adjacent field would also be dissolving that may produce the expanded effect as shown, almost like a ghost image, but that's just thinking of a theory and probably doesn't make sense. The marks aren't acid marks either, they're loads of small cuts, perhaps kept in a tin with other coins for many years.

My thoughts on the German forgery is that I reckon they had bigger fish to fry in 1945, than to bother themselves with bronze pennies

The visible lettering is too crude and close to the rim IMO. It looks more like an abused attempt at a cast copy to me. Any attempts at acid cleaning will thin the letters and reduce dimensions on all 3 axes if there is total immersion. The weight of a cast would obviously depend on the amount of metal poured into the mould, so I think not relevant in this instance.