VickySilver

Jaggy - coins DATED from the '80s and '90s? Or purchased then? Well, share pictures if you can. I certainly don't criticize spending more than others would for the right piece....

Nice rationale train there Jag.....I use similar myself, even as excuses to buy further coins to "cost average" downward. These are words of collectors, to be sure...BTW, the 48/7 went "63" at NGC.

This is one of those varietals that seems once discovered that people look for it and find more and more. I love 20th C. proof halfcrowns but haven't had interest in picking one up at the prices they supposedly have gone for.

These lower mint state coins on eBay can sometimes be quite the buy (not always though!) - I posted recently the 1848/6 shilling in MS61 that was a very nice win aaetheically.

Not sure if that is gold gold if you know what I mean. A lot more than 42 quid's worth of gold if it were actually that. I tend to think not; also, a lot of toning for gold.

That collection did not have any, just the early Vick proof groats went very high. I seem to recall some years ago one going for around 11k - and that was SOME years ago. I will stick to the "over" on the 15k.

Yes, I'd expect the 3d will go double or above that amount of estimate. Please see results from the recent DNW sale of late Vicky groats; my surprise is if it would go less than 15k.

Dip it, please! I don't think there is a lot to lose.

I never could quite sync up on this coin - when I did have the money (and they were a lot cheaper), none were available. And now 2 selling in such a short period. I guess this is Tyrant territory nowadays....

Yes, please keep us posted. I have an 1845 1/2 d that I am leaving alone (someone else had failed a cleaning test but it has retoned) but would like to practice!

I wonder if the Verdcare (sp?) would work. You've not much to lose. I wouldn't toss it until I had the replacement...LOL

Wow, that is interesting. Perhaps it had something to do with some of the experimentation about future coins and alloys that Rob mentioned about in his conversation with Graham Dyer? No obvious relevance that I can make out.

I rather like Viking themed coins, and the Isle of Man has some albeit not always of the finest design or engraving. The question is about the KM182 Viking on Horse which is known in copper nickel. Some catalogues have listed this as also being struck in gold and platinum but I have NEVER seen these. Has anybody seen or know of any other details or specifics?

That's an interesting point as they use one characteristic to measure another - amount of reflectivity versus amount of frosting contrast on the devices! I believe I had seen reflection of a pencil used. I am really OK with the three basic designations of proof, cameo and deep cameo (or ultra). There no doubt is some quibbling about coins on the border. I have shown my own 1839 half crown that is deep cameo (but where I have issues about what the grade is designated), and that one is clear as is the Adams 1961 penny. A separate number for amount of contrasting would be fought just as hard. But most collectors know that this is all subjective, the number or frosting amount depends on the judgement of the viewer.

The 1854 florin is fairly nice and a legitimate VF, amongst the better seen.

Yes, referred to as "blanching". Most green oxidation such as Sword showed seems to have a PVC component and in my experience there is a good chance of removal with the blot method of acetone with the high nap white cotton towel.

My 1915 does not have that. It looks like not fully struck up and maybe grease on die or similar.

Well, perhaps we are crossed on terms. The "C" does seem to be incised and even in taking the first closeup picture of reverse, from the picture it appears that the margin or edge of the wing-like shape looks to be as well with discolouration on the inside of the wing being what looks to be the residue. The obverse shape(s) really IMO appear to be localized collections of residue and/or oxidations of that residue. Many dilute dips can do that sort of thing if allowed to dry or desiccate. Still, you have the coin in hand, not us. Interesting, this series was the core of my collection at one point. The 1929 and 1934 dates are the only ones not struck in proof..

I think it might be incised possibly very lightly, including the C, and cleaned with a bit of the residual left. Does it look like the margins of the "wings" are recessed even minimally into the coin. My first thought was just the fluid left behind as per Sword.

Not to enter into this fray, but I wonder if the oxidation that occurs in PVC holders that is green in colour and sometimes called "green slime" is technically verdigris - this occurs on copper and silver, not gold that I've seen.

As far as a joke, I wouldn't say so. Please see my previous notes - on many occasions, if not most, the TPGs grade according to state of preservation with respect to how the coins left the dies. In other words, if softly struck but without wear or distracting marks, a relatively high grade may be achieved. One great example would be from this same date: the 1917 sixpence. I have seen even highly graded specimens that are flat on lion's snout and not well struck details in G's beard and hair even make the exalted MS67 level. A coin such as this, and a recent ?Heritage auction had TWO at that level is IMO inferior to what otherwise would be an MS65 but exceptionally well struck.

I just yesterday got my winning eBay coin after using eBay bucks for a very nice price. I don't know where the other bidders were but was happy to get it for less than 400 quid equivalent. This is PCGS coin number 225223 (not the cert number). Please help post pics if you can. The PCGS picture is not as pleasant as the coin in hand, I am delighted to report, and it seems to not show the rub and ticks shown in the picture. Not a gift, but nice price. I am not sure if it is nicer than the AU58 coin which is also pictured, that one an ex-Spink coin; I don't think I can keep both at this point!

I have seen some variation in the strike/poss. age of die but not too sure what else. I think I am not as patient for details as I once was, so may have missed. I know that the coin listed as PCGS64 is nicer than mine for sure, and better struck as well (wonder who has that one?).

Good observations and knowledge shared Jag!

Not that I am aware of, basically the overdate - I have not seen a "normal" second 8 in the digit. What seemed different to you ? His is a relatively nice specimen but perhaps a bit optimistic on the grading.