VickySilver

I think in the US, the cotton buds are referred to as Q-tips and some can be quite hard so be careful with friction on these. Presoaking the tip gets them a bit softer but if you've the inclination to rub out that persistant spot, you'd best not. Some spots are just going to be resistant to all but the most aggressive agents but then they leave their mark.

The thing that is interesting is that the 6d date shows up perfectly in the gap in the legend on the overstruck 1 pence. I actually bought it about 4 or 5 years ago from a smaller auction, can't remember at the moment. Rather a sore thumb in a hopper full of copper blanks as it is of course coppernickel with excellent lustre.

Well, what about cases where there is just residual dirt adhering to the surface - would you not clean with mild soap and water at least? I too have a bit of experience and can tell you that copper must be approached with temerity, although mild treatments can be tried. I suggest if you have the time or inclination that you experiment with bits of lesser to no value to see how metal reacts in certain circumstances. A few "pearls": no abrasives no copper magic or other acid dips acetone which is pure should be safe tamping, as opposed to rubbing surface with clean white cotton towel is good way for removal of excess solvent always wash thoroughly with water and then tamp down as the water itself may have harmful electolytes Well, more if you ask.

Half sov is 4.00 gm of 22k (which is 0.916). If math is right that is 3.664 net gm. versus the 4.16 x 0.900, or 3.74 gm. pure gold....

I did see one some years ago that came up in a Spink Numismatic Circular List that was probably "undergraded" at GEF and subsequently got back a PCGS 65RB and is in their census (or at least was). That coin had beautiful unbroken silky lustre, strike and surfaces that may have surpassed the numerical grade - I believe such a coin would be worthy of a bidding war if it were to come up at major auction.

No doubt a simple error to them, not to us. I think they do not take British coins seriously. These people sell coins for into the 100s of thousands in USD, so a measly 800 pound coin means little to them unfortunately. As an aside, I wonder what a truly nice ME would bring (in numericals, a CGS 85 or PCGS 65)?

Those copper "oxide" states reflect levels of ionization and would reflect generically the state of the copper and not the specific salt such as chloride, sulfide, etc. It is the right general idea, however it is the oxidizing substance that determines the appearance of the surface of the coin with the chloride and chloride compounds giving the familiar green and usually the sulfides that give the "rainbow toning". The anion is not usually oxygen. I do not pretend to be an expert but the reactions can actually be quite complex and many times more than one type going on with respect to the surface of any one coin.

Some have postulated (and I agree) that the problem with fingerprints is not the oil or electrolytes in the sweat directly, but rather the action of bacteria on the oil that generates acidic metabolites that selectively oxidize the contact points from the print.

You can find Vickie coppers and Edward VII as well...

I agree with the bit about having fresh designs, but the logic of reissues being fresh eludes me. Also, probably not too many of these collector specials will be reaching the man in the street (or woman either!).

I believe the current thought is that this is due to alloy mixture and the variable oxidation rates of it. When it is a bit uneven there often may occur the so-called "woodgrain" effect.

Yes, rare is rare. Evidently these were made for 6d, 1/- (English, not sure about Scotish), 2/-, 2/6. Some years ago I got the shilling in an European auction but not seen the others - they are in ESC which I do not have with me as I am away from home for a week or so more. ESC quoted R6 for the shilling.

Yes, I concur and was getting ready to say that much depends on the original strike as well as some specimes are struck with the rim "finning" and may appear a bit thicker but that is rather a corollary to what has just been posted. Also, neither date would be a target for a counterfeiter as they are not rare and would not be much profit in faking such a small denomination even in the 1940s. I was beginning to get excited right as you first were describing these coins as I was hoping you had found one of the pattern 1946 6ds in cupro-nickel, and that would have been a special rarity....

Well, we are not yet on the log value scale where one man's uncirculated is not quite someone else's and a point or two on the Sheldon (or CGS) scale double or trebles the value - generally ridiculous in my opinion. Still a nice 1932 with plenty of red and the newly reduced George's head with good strike detail and lustrous fields is more attractive than a drab brown coin with a lot of bagmarks, so a bit of a dilemma here. A 1932 or perhaps a 1934 fitting the former description might be a 65-80 pound item in my book, but not 200, at least yet. Well that is my vote. BTW, I had thought the 1934 issue was mint darkened but have an example tha seems to have a lot of golden red to it that does not look cleaned or darkened & not to pirate this thread but does anybody else have similar experience?

Price on the 1871 is pretty good up through another 50% higher at least and decent for grade with only a few expected contact marks for grade. Wow! I like the 1875H and would go for it at that price if I did not already have one just a bit better. Of course the usual disclaimer that it should be seen in hand but looks great even in supersize. I think it would be quite decent at 100-150 pounds higher. The 1864 is almost there but some rather distracting edge damage. I imagine he has accounted for that in price by giving it a good 40-50% price hit. In case you didn't get it: I LIKE THE 1875H!!!!

This proliferation of issues and reissues is quite over the top in my opinion. I remeber rather liking the gold Britannias as they got started and even got a one and a half ounce (which I wear on a chain to this day). But then they kept dumping unc. and proof bullion pieces in all the fractionals each and every year for twenty years, and I have just left them alone. Ditto the silver Britannias. Now each of the denominations is issued and reissued in all different metal compositions and feature increasingly inane commemorations, and I get the feeling that the Royal Mint is emulating the private mints with their "coins" struck for Liberia, Fanning Island, etc. They seem to be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, and - I really don't care if there are arteficial rarities being created, and god bless the buyers of such.

Well, CGS hardly has a universal grading system and it has a different numbering system from the others to boot (1-100 versus 1-70) so I think it would be a mistake to dump the descriptive designation. PCGS and NGC have very successfully used designations such as EF45 and I think the two spaces taken by letters are worthwhile - these have now been used for 23 years.As has been stated above, numbering systems are not for everybody and a bit of redundancy would still appeal to a much wider audience. BTW, and as an aside, I am not at all sure that CGS is more conservative. I have a Specimen 1935 in CGS85 that is definately not up to the same type coin that I have in NGC65. Maybe I will be able to go hi-tech and eventually figure out how to get some pictures...

Might be a technical grade unc. with soft/weak strike. This would have to be seen in hand though. EF would be a fair call until it shows better (if it does) in hand. Since filling this gap some years ago I really have not kept up with these early 20s dates of shillings and was wondering if demand would EVER materialise.

I have always been disappointed with the absolutes that we see thrown about in descriptions of proofs. I think there are tendencies and some characteristics more in line with proof status. I also have come to be of the opinion that the Royal Mint was not always that careful with dies or planchets and so we get polished die pieces, and coins that appear superior to the usual circulation strikes but not quite proof and designate them "specimen" and what may have been employment of proof dies in striking circulation strikes. Proofs from the George V series beginning in about 1922 or so (depends on who is counting what) were many times not stellar and not always clearly superior to the best first strikes off the dies. Of course the Wreaths are perhaps best known for very nice currency strikes with a few being quite prooflike and some appearing to reach what seemed to be proof quality at the time. I have seen a few certified/slabbed as proof that I am fairly certain are not despite relatively squared sharp edges and crisp milling. Somewhat analagous to the Victorian currency/Maundy 3d discrimination and in requiring definite status as currency before being accepted as such, I think a particular coin can not be considered proof unless it meets all of the general criteria. These are interesting but from the photos and despite their impaired status, I do not think can be accepted as proof and could not buy or sell them as such.

Ditto on that one. Send us pictures if you can. In the meanwhile, going only on what you told us, simple mild dish detergent/soap with hot water would be a good start. Then an acetone bath with these. To tell you more is quite difficult at this stage.

I am not convinced that oil application is the best idea as there are all sorts of oils, some with mildly acidic properties. Another issue is that in this polluted modern environment that most of us live in features many organics that may utilize the oil as a solvent and gain a better access to the surfaces of the coin - this even in paper envelopes, 2x2s or mylar holders as these are airborne. I remember being amazed by the concept of vapor pressure exerted even by seemingly inert substance such as metals or plastics, and so we know that everyday exposures to our coins (let alone ourselves) occurs with such compounds as the bonding agents in carpeting. How important are they? Probably nobody knows for sure and varies a good bit.And different from place to place.

Well, I am definately not on the other side of the fence on this one, but one aspect of added value afforded by the slabbing (and I mean NGC, PCGS, or possibly CGS) one has at least some sort of backing to declaration of grade or type to a "sight unseen" coin.

Gary, I guess we are getting a bit off the topic, but is your picture of the coin(s) the one you are contemplating sending off? There are two pictures of 1970 reverse penny, so I must be missing something unless you are wondering if it is a "double reverse" coin you are trying to authenticate. Can you give a bit more information?

The 1860 1/4d pieces listed in that catalogue were long since disposed of and the records on the site were kept so that readers might refer to essentially a library on all of the known pieces. The 1864 as best is known was held back, and is truly a tremendous piece (or at least appears to be and would love to hold it in hand). Interesting to see what any of these pieces might bring in London auctions by a major house these days....

Well, that is a rather difficult question to ask as the alternatives are not quite connceted. I think at least in the States that the slab if PCGS or NGC will raise the price over a raw coin that is unslabbed. That is not linked to the difficulies of photography of the coin however. A great coin for sale in the UK may not have a higher price in the slab, and so there is a difference in venue, so thus the conditional in my answer.