VickySilver

And I think for an EF or better coin, that might be an option....?!....

I too think damaged Vick crowns a problem at sale, sad to say I'm in the 50 quid camp...

I did a careful measurement, and came up with the measurement from the outer point of the "1" to the Left Upright of the "N" at the beginning of the diagonal downstroke is pretty much exact distance as that from outer point of the "1" to the mark on your coin. I'm still not sure how there is not an area of increased relief around it as perhaps might be expected if the remainder of the mintmark was ground away on the die....

I'm still getting a delta (space difference) of greater magnitude from the left facing tip on the top stroke of the "1"to the nearer stroke of the H on the mint marked coin greater than on your specimen - if that makes sense.

Hi there, I meant gash to the die. I used some homemade calipers and compare the spot on your coin to the "H" and both upstrokes on the "N" and it (the "dot"/die ding) does not line up, at least with the placement of those particular H and KN mintmarks.

On my monitor it appears as more of a mini-gash with a bit of different toning about it, and not so much a dot? I agree the location curious but still don't see it the way other "dots" are, appearing as though a dedicated punch was at work. If a partially expunged mintmark, I would think more of a dished area in relief....

Hmmm, looks like die nick as opposed to purposeful dot...

Die prep, the latter. Former, a bit of scrunge left a slight bit of increase oxidation - hopefully not raised.

Yes, indeed, very nice coins. I like some nice mostly "red" copper/bronze coins that are rather well struck. For some reason, the KN coins of 1918 and 19 come with better obverses than the H's so finding a non-mushy H is a nice thing indeed. I remember reading some years ago that there was a hoard of 18H's that came to market but that whilst red, all were of the mushy obverse type (hey, did I "coin" a new hyper-varietal? - No, just a die state....).

I had been thinking a bit about this, and think perhaps a glance (gawk) at the PCGS grading bit might be of interest. I can think of one example of a coin I am fully prepared to accept as "uncirculated" that happens to be slabbed in a PCGS64 - the coin is a fully prooflike 1893 Jub Head 6d that has only the lightest of bag marks, beautiful and clearly not having knocked or rubbed about in somebody's pockets. Coinery, it seemed to me that is just the definition the earlier posters were putting up....

Uh, Dave had it right, I am just sick of people going off pop reports from the slabbers; obviously I do not know you from any other. Possibly there are other coins out there of merit that may be equal or even better, who knows? There are some coins that are absolute beauties, no question. Funny how the bit about negatives came out as I suppose I can't judge myself but think I am rather a positive person who loves nice milled coins, particularly silver and copper. Well, sorry if taken wrong but possibly not in the w--ker mode.... PS - I have coins that are a full 50 points better than the next reported by ANY slabbed and yet don't make the "finest known" claim.

Well, like to see the picture of the latter. I must say, as apparently do many others, that such claims are rather hollow ("finest known"). I find the 19H is very hard to find well struck and nicely preserved - moreso than the 18H.

I feel that marks picked up in the pocket generally differ from those accumulated from falling down the chute and bagging - please see USA Morgan dollars as examples; rub on high points being different than slight impact from other coins in a bag as one example of this. I think the term as it is starting to be defined in this post is more aptly described by the moniker "FDC" or fleur de coin.

Well, pretty strong on 1838-1970 but pretty much have everything by date, excepting an upgrade or two - none here....

Interesting bunch of material, but no fight over late 6d material out of me! LOL

Yes, the latter it was speculated was struck in different gold alloys to test the new Egyptian gold to be struck by the Royal Mint. What I thought interesting is that there would be so many bits shipped off to Pretoria, and in many cases NONE necessarily retained by the mother mint (e.g. the 1922/24 proof sets). Well, I confess to border teeth length and thumb length changes still don't impress me as major changes the way say Old Effigy vs. Mod Effigy would be.

Not sure about this, but in his references I have never seen that he actually had seen or possessed one.

Not to slightly pirate the post, but I still can not figure out why the Royal Mint would make but two 1922/1924 proof sets and then ship them off to Pretoria, nor why other patterns such as at least one each of the gold trial 3d and 6d would go there. Their holdings were evidently truly remarkable, and don't know if any record of them was made or available - hello Rob?? Not that anyone would necessarily care, but I am slightly inclined to heap some of these on the "hypervarietal" dustbin, although a bit of passing interest and wonder if there might be similar sentiment by others. I believe that the best specimen overall of the 1926 ME that I have seen was that now evidently slabbed by PCGS as MS65RB and was from a illustrated Spink SNC extensive late milled offering about 1999/2000 - I wonder if that was one of these varietals as it was head and shoulders above the "65" coin auctioned by Heritage this last January?

G5 may not have gone over it with microscopy however...

I have avidly collected both mint patterns in off metal, and errors of same. These at one time were fairly inexpensive (such as a 1962 struck on penny planchet) but have gone up now in value by an order of magnitude. BTW, a blatant spam, but if anybody has redundant predecimal OMS please do PM me.

I'm wondering in general how the usage of half sovereigns was. They seem to have been used in commerce but that the full sov was utilised much more frequently, domestic and overseas. Not quite related but several of the half sovs in EF or better are really quite scarce and yet not respected as such, coins such as the 1879 London half sov scarce to start with evidently and then even far fewer saved aside - exhaustive collections put together over decades such as the Terner did not even have one (admittedly he wanted only mint state pieces).

Ah, yes a bit of a weigh in from me: I have never seen a record of an 1854 half sov for sale, and have not seen any record of anyone ever having actually seen one. These are listed is some old catalogues, but I have not always been that fond of Marsh (with all due respect).. 2015 Spink does not. I have not seen any value listed in recent times and don't recall even from old tomes either. As far as mintage listings for particular years - there is no reason to suspect the actual numbers, but as Rob has said, but there is no recording of which dated die was used and there is evidence that this is the case.

And has there been enough die study to rule out "hybrids"? His specimen looks to have the hollow neck with prominent sternocleidomastoid muscle and recess/space just posterior to the right of it.

I agree with that. Looks like a copper oxidation spot enhancing the bag mark and a bit also at the bust truncation...

I concur with the acid and have seen very similar effect when high molar acid is used (e.g. nitric, hydrochloric) and there is a more pronounce "boiling" effect of metal off the surface.