VickySilver

Absolutely, and even the halfcrown has a bit of drama to it somehow....The florin looks OK until you actually get a closeup of Britannia's face - Uggh! A blowup of that rather dulled my enthusiasm for the issue's aesthetics. Still I love them.

May not that be that much of investment at the right price until another comes along. Also, in slight counter point, even if it is not as scarce, demand is king!

gF - I'm OK with that. 50 pounds seems a bit cheap, but 100 steep. How about 80? That is not an offer however!

I'm wondering if these sale results are reflecting a softening of the market in mid-level coins?

Yes, I have seen these somewhere...Hmmm, where??? Beirut conglomerations? Possibly.

Very similar to my own gF (yikes I hate having such a poor specimen) coin in all ways, including the date. I vote REAL DEAL.

The shape of the King's head, not to mention ALL the lettering look terrible and poorly done. Which, pray tell, was the auction house?

As a side issue with these coins (and many others as well), when the coin is not fully struck that planchet prep marks are still remaining on the "unstruck" areas of coin surface - and these include marks and scrapes, etc. on the planchet BEFORE being struck. These are occasionally misintrepeted as wear when in fact it is not.

None for me. I used to love their sales but precious little of late. Be interesting how prices fare....

Well, a couple of other factors might play a role (probably more but still not up for the day yet): on the .925 1914-19 were relatively long die life strikes = worn dies and possibly less deeply struck on the 1920 and later dates, save the proofs, these were struck into harder coin alloy dies redesigned on this with less depth of field

Yes, another spot to look for is Vicky's braid, etc. Too much money!

OK, this discussion is reminding me of the US chat rooms of the NT/AT wars (=naturally toned versus artificially toned). It seems they believe EVERYTHING is naturally toned even if they are neon colored...

Of course there are many types of "dip", and this would include acetone, rubbing alcohol, soap and water, olive oil, turpentine, gasoline, Jewel Lustre, etc. Some are mildly acidic, some stronger, some not acidic at all; some oxidize the metal surface free of "toning oxidants", some merely clean adherent detritus, dirt, etc. I am always suspicious of even toned coins as having been "cleaned" but there is a spectrum of cleaning (ie see the "finer" of the 1905 halfcrowns in the LCA auctions current sale), as well as retoning of cleaned coins, etc. (see ebay's famous "Greattoning" seller - LOL). I have seen, and indeed have, some coins that have been lightly dipped with little apparent loss of lustre. Interesting about the sandy soil bit as usually there are choride compounds lurking in such, but evidently not at Rob's locale...

I am afraid the vast majority of untoned pieces have been dipped. I can not prove the point but have some experience; it is not always a bad thing, but many times is poorly done which then becomes problematic especially when trying to "upgrade" a particular piece as was alluded to above. I don't know the history of your florins, but if was a betting person and based on NOT having the piece in hand that they were likely dipped. With due respects to Rob, I believe most dug ancients including silver are in rather a poor state even if from the middle of a hoard and that most have been cleaned. If I ever figure out how to effectively post a decent image I have a late 5th Cent. BC Athenian Tetradrachm that would be a perfect example as it is near to mint state, probably dipped and only now starting to retone.

Run, Forrest, Run! These are all fakes until PROVEN otherwise... It does not look bad, but these have been faked ad infinitum.

That 1877 farthing would go for serious money, and has! Where are the coins from this set?

Overall rarity: Might rank it after the 1839 currency half crown, maybe, and the 1854 and 1863 florins. 1853 Britannia currency groat is pretty rare as well & high grade 54 and 93 Jub 6d's. Others?

I think not as rare as quite that in the lower grades, IMO maybe 200. EF and above?Yikes! I might hazard a gues of 5-10 excluding museums???

5 does look pretty soft compared to the rest of the digits. I have seen these 5s before as well. Rest of the coin looks pretty good. That is a hard call with the area of origin a problem also in my book. Still, sometimes this is how bargains are had. A "no call" from me with the usual caveat of needing to see it in hand.

Does not appear the specimen. I have seen the other specimen 6d of 1924, part of the set. I think this may be on the www.HA.com archives from about 6-8 yrs ago (the whole set including the "wondrous" 1922 rev. 1927 penny). Yours looks well struck and to be an early strike of what should most likely be a 0.500. coin.

Also: xylene and toluene are EXTREMELY toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic. I would NOT play with these. Acetone is a bit dangerous but use it frequently myself but doubt it will work (ie also the active ingredient in nail polish remover).

That is my usual choice as well. BTW, how did you "cream" the video bidder? Hypothetically speaking of course....LOL

Yes, a bit of problem as are many proof or special issue coins. Many, including me think these were proofs but that the dies were not necessarily maintained to that standard. And evidently these crowns were struck for many years afterward. Sometimes were struck without edge marking and even evidently in pure silver. As the dies aged and were not "reprepped" the cameo effect would gradually be lost and the resultant coins would lose some/most of their proof qualities, etc.... What to call them? If not of quality to be termed proof, I imagine few would quarrel with the label "specimen".

Shiny yes, proof no. Looks to be rather flat details and devices...

I too will weigh in on this: acid bath, and have a couple as well.