VickySilver

Isn't that process termed "knurling"? Not sure but that is PMD (post mint damage).

I guess technically that at least this pattern is not base metal - %52 silver!!! I may drop off a couple of patterns for analysis come November if I can not sooner.

Looks straight out of the US Mint catalogue! UgggH!

I still slobber over that 1882 London mint coin, and wished the funds had been there - price high, but a bargain compared to those infernal "narrow dates". The 1869 was beautiful as well, not to mention the 1864 and the 1875H and the 19KN, and the ....

The local University charges outrageous sums for any investigations, so have left them alone. Alas, my alma mater is too far away to use them as I have a few specimens I would like checked.

I must admit to not having the equipment, and that it was also a surface spectroscopy (XRF), thankfully non-destructive. I have a couple others (denominations) that I will try the next time I get a chance. I seem to recall the BM having a couple of different specimens of differing metal alloys of same period. I will also see if I can manage either the 1923 or 4 "nickel" pieces, the latter date evidently struck to 5.0 and 5.7 gm. standards but the alloy of which I have not seen published.

I recently tested a pattern 1920 shilling, and the metal content came to: Silver - 51.67% Copper - 39.57% Nickel - 7.36% Manganese 0.28% Arsenic (!) 0.015% The George V standard was in 1920 evidently" Silver - 50% Copper - 45% Manganese 5% By 1924, this was at: Silver - 50% Copper - 50% Any comments or interest???

That 1919 is quite a nice specimen and certainly better struck than the "H"s of that year....

Lavrilliers look bad enough, this a bad copy of an ugly coin. Five quid maybe (if it looked a bit nicer!).

I, for one, do not believe the collector base is expanding; quite the opposite & we see even rarer dates in lesser condition to languish at mere fractions of their higher grade brethren of the same date and type. Also, am of the opinion that the so-called bottom dweller coins are staying just there, with the middle bits subsiding. High-enders either go higher and higher, or in a few cases appear to be languishing in comparison to their highs.

No doubt. I think another interesting bit relating back to the SG/Baldwin's discussion is that Baldwin had (or has?) an investment program, whereby coins are stashed away by them as purchased by some sort of fund they created themselves. What has become of this particular fund?

Who is buying coins such as ANY of these three crowns? I love Victorians absolutely but just can not see how the crown (1839) is worth half that amount. A bit sad to see collectors likely being chased away....

Interesting points there, Rob. I don't see a lot in my area anymore, partly because I have nearly all the bits I have targeted, and partly because the prices of what I lack are absolutely astronomical and I refuse to pay the prices - just trying for the occasional bit. Wonder if that is how others are?

Think that might be a protective rumour as they found one of the 1864s just recently, allegedly by moving furniture about - somebody "back in the day" having dropped it behind a desk, and LEAVING it there.... A friend not so long ago was promised a tour of that famous basement, and that offer rescinded at the last moment...

True the above. They may be isolating themselves from the ordinary collector & that is just how they've been for such a very long time. Still the place has a bit of aura & mystery - who wouldn't like to have a look around their famous basement?

Hi Bob, bit interesting that he (Steve) has related that to you. Baldwin's has had some of the very rarest copper bits ever seen in the latter milled series incl. the 1860 copper farthing and halfpennies, 1864 COPPER "patterns" (plural), 1877 proof farthings, 1933 pennies, the 1952 proof penny....

Uh, no, not for me either. Bit of gold, milled silver not so great, not seeing coppers...

Yes, nice bit there. I think most ancient have been cleaned to some degree. Not sure but looks like it may have been in water for some while with a bit of porosity there.

I seem to recall there being some on a regular basis on the older SNC. Hate to use the word cleaned in this case - dipped possibly more likely IMHO.

Ha ha, well that would put them in front of the Royal Mint!!

Rob, is that just my eyesight or is that a bit of metal extending above the top loop of the 8? These two look a bit different and diff. type of overdate perhaps??

In the meanwhile, to quote Forrest Gump: "Run, Forrest, run"!

Ha ha, good one....North Carolina through New Jersey/New York, meant to say.

I concur with the above comments. I know there are several collectors in the mid-Atlantic, but they are a bit reclusive and might only be "lured" by really rare and / or choice bits. Since it has not directly been mentioned, and at the risk of repeating what you already know, then the following by date in better than VF would be of more interest: 1864 (both types), 1867, 1868, 1869, 1871, 1875H, 1882 London ( no "H", and would be likely OK in a much lesser state), 1918H & KN, 1919 H & KN, 1926ME.

Keep that enthusiasm! More pictures, please....