Which coin would you prefere

[VickySilver]

Under the Pop Report, Great Britain. George V Halfcrowns proof (these are under the currency strikes).

The PCGS # is on the Left hand side. If you  select that blue number, which is 512833 the coin obverse and reverse photos  will appear .

[1949threepence]

6 hours ago, VickySilver said:

How's this for strike? (please help with image): 

1920 Halfcrown

 

PCGS Coin Number 512833

Link - here  

Image below

Reasonable strike as far as I can see, but not good enough picture to supply a more definitive judgement, IMO. Especially in terms of the reverse. 

Also an odd colour which surely cannot be solely down to toning. More likely the photography.   

 

Edited October 26, 2018 by 1949threepence

[PWA 1967]

Maybe the metal mix for proofs was different allowing for a better strike and the reason for the colour.Not collecting silver i dont have a clue but was told that some 1920 Florins have a higher silver content and although much scarcer these tend to have a much better strike.

Perhaps none of it is correct and someone may correct me saying its wrong 😊

Edited October 26, 2018 by PWA 1967

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, PWA 1967 said:

Maybe the metal mix for proofs was different allowing for a better strike and the reason for the colour.Not collecting silver i dont have a clue but was told that some 1920 Florins have a higher silver content and although much scarcer these tend to have a much better strike.

Perhaps none of it is correct and someone may correct me saying its wrong 😊

The colour just doesn't look right, Pete. It's more like a bronze or copper coin.  

Edited October 26, 2018 by 1949threepence

[PWA 1967]

I just went off Eric mentioning proof and the top of the page saying it was also ,maybe i got that bit confused 😉

The colour maybe more along the lines of the metal mix and the reason sometimes you see tiny flecks of verd that have got into the metal.

On Michael goubys website he says...... "different mixes were tried for silver coins from 1920 and again in 1922"

The mix for 1920 being Half silver and half Cupro nickel.......The cupro nickel being 90% copper and 10% Nickel.

Maybe i am way off the mark ............... on his website he does go into more detail on other years.

Pete.

Some of this probably does not make sense now you have edited your post Mike 😂

Edited October 26, 2018 by PWA 1967

[Peckris 2]

44 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

I just went off Eric mentioning proof and the top of the page saying it was also ,maybe i got that bit confused 😉

The colour maybe more along the lines of the metal mix and the reason sometimes you see tiny flecks of verd that have got into the metal.

On Michael goubys website he says...... "different mixes were tried for silver coins from 1920 and again in 1922"

The mix for 1920 being Half silver and half Cupro nickel.......The cupro nickel being 90% copper and 10% Nickel.

Maybe i am way off the mark ............... on his website he does go into more detail on other years.

Pete.

Some of this probably does not make sense now you have edited your post Mike 😂

No, believe me - it's not the alloy mix. However, it COULD be toning; I've seen pre-1920 silver tone to a whole range of colours - reds, oranges, blues, purples - and this could be toning due to its storage medium.

[PWA 1967]

Yes i believe you Peck 😊 just me thinking out loud and not having a clue that if a coin was made up of 45% Copper for one year it may be that some are a different colour.

Will just call it toning 

[1949threepence]

59 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

I just went off Eric mentioning proof and the top of the page saying it was also ,maybe i got that bit confused 😉

The colour maybe more along the lines of the metal mix and the reason sometimes you see tiny flecks of verd that have got into the metal.

On Michael goubys website he says...... "different mixes were tried for silver coins from 1920 and again in 1922"

The mix for 1920 being Half silver and half Cupro nickel.......The cupro nickel being 90% copper and 10% Nickel.

Maybe i am way off the mark ............... on his website he does go into more detail on other years.

Pete.

Some of this probably does not make sense now you have edited your post Mike 😂

It does make sense Pete. I edited my post because I realised it didn't make logical sense in its earlier form. 

10 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

No, believe me - it's not the alloy mix. However, it COULD be toning; I've seen pre-1920 silver tone to a whole range of colours - reds, oranges, blues, purples - and this could be toning due to its storage medium.

Some of my pre 1920 one's have toned quite spectacularly even since I've had them. It has to be something to do with storage, although what I'm doing wrong I don't know, as they're in a Peter Nichols cabinet in a dry warm room. It's the upward facing reverses that have received the toning.   

I say some, as others are 100% unaffected. Indeed, all the Edward VII ones are unaffected.    

[Cliff]

I confess not being able to tell the difference BUT is Vickysilver's halfcrown a Hollow Neck (Old ESC 767, New ESC 3719)?  If so, would that make any difference to the strike and composition?

[VickySilver]

The coin is not tampered with and was a trial/proof strike. The coin came from an odd source and eventually was sourced through Mark Rasmussen. I was also able to get the shilling and florin, but not the sixpence. I would like to do an XRF to at least get a surface alloy read. The strike is superb quite naturally and IMO VERY UNDERGRADED. I think I had mentioned this on another post but the British Museum has an excellent collection of alloy trials from the period of of 1920-1924.....

[Peckris 2]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Some of my pre 1920 one's have toned quite spectacularly even since I've had them. It has to be something to do with storage, although what I'm doing wrong I don't know, as they're in a Peter Nichols cabinet in a dry warm room. It's the upward facing reverses that have received the toning.   

I say some, as others are 100% unaffected. Indeed, all the Edward VII ones are unaffected.    

Snap. For example, I have a 1938S shilling that was absolutely BU - now it has an uneven dirty black tarnish on parts of it despite storage in a cabinet. Pennies have lost a great deal of lustre. Strangely, coins in flips or albums don't seem to suffer. The upside is that my Unc 1838 shilling that was so glossy you might think it had been polished, is now toning back nicely. 

The other weird thing is that coins in my small Nichols cabinet (Mascle?) are largely unaffected.

[Sword]

2 hours ago, VickySilver said:

The coin is not tampered with and was a trial/proof strike. The coin came from an odd source and eventually was sourced through Mark Rasmussen. I was also able to get the shilling and florin, but not the sixpence. I would like to do an XRF to at least get a surface alloy read. The strike is superb quite naturally and IMO VERY UNDERGRADED. I think I had mentioned this on another post but the British Museum has an excellent collection of alloy trials from the period of of 1920-1924.....

Just been to the PCGS website to have a look and I agree that strike is indeed superb and proof. If you have the PCGS certification number handy, then I can try to get a bigger photo.

[1949threepence]

2 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

Snap. For example, I have a 1938S shilling that was absolutely BU - now it has an uneven dirty black tarnish on parts of it despite storage in a cabinet. Pennies have lost a great deal of lustre. Strangely, coins in flips or albums don't seem to suffer. The upside is that my Unc 1838 shilling that was so glossy you might think it had been polished, is now toning back nicely. 

The other weird thing is that coins in my small Nichols cabinet (Mascle?) are largely unaffected.

My Nicholls is a Mascle........

I can honestly say that none of my pennies have been adversely affected. The toning (if toning it can be called) is confined to my shilling collection for dates between 1914 and 1919. None of the 1920 and after specimens have been toned - one or two had already toned slightly when I had them, and they've not changed. 

But the 1919 shilling I had has toned considerably. I think I posted the image on here when I first got it in 2009. So I'll try and find that and post a current picture for comparison. 

 

[Sword]

8 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

Snap. For example, I have a 1938S shilling that was absolutely BU - now it has an uneven dirty black tarnish on parts of it despite storage in a cabinet. Pennies have lost a great deal of lustre. Strangely, coins in flips or albums don't seem to suffer. The upside is that my Unc 1838 shilling that was so glossy you might think it had been polished, is now toning back nicely. 

The other weird thing is that coins in my small Nichols cabinet (Mascle?) are largely unaffected.

I suppose coins in plastic have less things to react with than coins in a cabinet such as the chemicals in the cloth, free flowing air, potential emissions from wood etc. Cabinets are handmade furniture and I guess each one is somewhat unique.

[Peckris 2]

41 minutes ago, Sword said:

I suppose coins in plastic have less things to react with than coins in a cabinet such as the chemicals in the cloth, free flowing air, potential emissions from wood etc. Cabinets are handmade furniture and I guess each one is somewhat unique.

True, but most cabinets (and all Nichols?) use inert woods like mahogany. As for the free flowing air, you may have a point there - the toning is nearly all on coins in the large cabinet, which I later found was a medals cabinet with comparatively deep trays and no individual recesses for coins.

[Sword]

Whats comes to mind is the term "cabinet toning". 

Probably no wood is totally inert and the felts probably do trap substances over time. Don't get me wrong, I love toned coins and think that it is probably a good thing if cabinets do help coins tone just a little faster. 

 

[1949threepence]

11 minutes ago, Sword said:

Whats comes to mind is the term "cabinet toning". 

Probably no wood is totally inert and the felts probably do trap substances over time. Don't get me wrong, I love toned coins and think that it is probably a good thing if cabinets do help coins tone just a little faster. 

 

Yes, but if they're old coins, it does make you kind of wonder where they were kept for the previous nearly 100 odd years, if just a further nine in a mahogany cabinet can accelerate toning to the extent that it has.  

[Sword]

7 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Yes, but if they're old coins, it does make you kind of wonder where they were kept for the previous nearly 100 odd years, if just a further nine in a mahogany cabinet can accelerate toning to the extent that it has.  

I have indeed wondered how coins were kept in the past. Surely, the majority weren't kept in cabinets (or there will be many more antique ones available today)? Yet we still have a reasonable quantity of coins well preserved and in the top grade.

I now use quadrums. Prior to that I used 2 x 2s. Tried slabbing with cgs before that. Have tried and rejected coin capsules first. Don't have a large enough collection to justify using a cabinet. I would be at a lost with regard to coin storage if plastic has never been invented. 

[Nick]

Bigger pictures of VS's 1920 proof halfcrown.

[Sword]

One very impressive coin!

[VickySilver]

Thanks Nick and Sword, I am a nincompoop when it comes to pictures technology.

I was still shocked when the grade was only 61 with NO HAIRLINES OR MARKS under magnification...

Edited October 26, 2018 by VickySilver

[1949threepence]

Still looks a weird colour to me. 

But that apart and in answer to the original question, yes, it is a very good strike.  

 

[Rob]

3 hours ago, VickySilver said:

I was still shocked when the grade was only 61 with NO HAIRLINES OR MARKS under magnification...

Maybe they were struggling to reconcile a good strike with a 1920 halfcrown. My hypothesis is that they looked at it, trying to find a fault such as a copy which would lead to rejection, but found none. As this clearly didn't match up to the splendid indifference of strike usually seen (and these accorded high grades), they gave it a low grade to cover their a**e. Fish out of water springs to mind.