candrews09 Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 http://m.imgur.com/a/Hw1h9 Looking help with the worn 1948 Florin in the photo album above. I have added comparison photos to a real 1948 florin. It is the same diameter as the real one but about 1/2 the width. The quality of the obverse and reverse seem to match perfectly yet I believe it is made of silver. Only ping and ice tests done, no magnet. Searched all over the Internet and can't find any information about a thin silver florin. Any ideas? Quote
Rob Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 Struck on the wrong blank. I have a 1967 that is also too thin and origianlly a blank used for Burundi coinage. It's unlikely to be silver as virtually everyone was using Cupro-Nickel by then. If you send it to the Royal Mint, they might be able to tell you what the host flan was originally used for. Quote
Colin G. Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 I am not as convinced, I think it could have been squashed (hence the flat areas) and had the rims filed off. It is amazing what a difference in thickness occurs if the rims are removed. I have seen a few farthings without rims (post mint damage) and the coins just appear substantially thinner. What convinces you it is on the wrong blank Rob? I admit is does seem slightly off-track on the Obverse, but that could also be due to being squashed. Quote
Nordle11 Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, Colin G. said: I am not as convinced, I think it could have been squashed (hence the flat areas) and had the rims filed off. It is amazing what a difference in thickness occurs if the rims are removed. I have seen a few farthings without rims (post mint damage) and the coins just appear substantially thinner. What convinces you it is on the wrong blank Rob? I admit is does seem slightly off-track on the Obverse, but that could also be due to being squashed. I wouldn't say it's filed because the rims still have their reeding, otherwise it would have a lot more striations which wouldn't be as uniform as in the picture. I would also go with wrong blank. Quote
Coinery Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 Wouldn't the deepest parts of the design be the weak areas if a thin flan was used? How did your's strike up, Rob? Quote
Coinery Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 Is it greater in diameter than the comparison coin? The rims look wider, could it have been struck without a collar/broken collar? Quote
candrews09 Posted March 9, 2017 Author Posted March 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, Coinery said: Is it greater in diameter than the comparison coin? The rims look wider, could it have been struck without a collar/broken collar? Diameter seems to be the exact same. In person, I know it is difficult to tell, but the main body of the coin is definitely thinner than that or the real one. As quite a new collector this is the first coin that has me stumped. Quote
Coinery Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 Do you have coins scales? What are the weights? If it genuinely feels thinner, in all reality it probably is! Quote
VickySilver Posted March 10, 2017 Posted March 10, 2017 Looks CuNi, not silver to me, and struck on a thinner and/or smaller flans. I love the off-metal strikes but I think this not. Now if you can only find a 1946 florin struck in copper-nickel! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.