help to grade these silver pls

[Nek17 0]

As a newbie, I'd like to hear your expert's grading on these ones I just purchased (I am collecting all grades for certain years to learn/use as reference), then I will pub my own grading but keep the vendor's advertised grade in secret just in case I purchased it from someone in this forum

These all passed my weight, size and ping tests Magnetic not yet to be received...

Many thanks!!

Coin1:

(to be continued - only two pics per page? these are all links though )

[Nek17 0]

Coin2:

[Nek17 0]

Coin3:

[Nek17 0]

Coin4:

[Nek17 0]

Coin5:

[Nek17 0]

Coin6:

[Nek17 0]

Coin7:

[Nek17 0]

Coin8:

[Paulus 1,975]

Hi Nek, welcome to what must be the best coin forum for British predecimal in the world!

My grading would be (and I am not an expert):

Coin 1 (British Guiana issue) GF

Coin 2 Fine +

Coin 3 NVF

Coin 4 Fine +

Coin 5 VF

Coin 6 VF +

Coin 7 VF (cleaned?)

Coin 8 Near Fine (NF)

Why 1818 onwards and not 1816 (as your interest)?

Edited March 14, 2013 by Paulus

[Coinery 1,156]

Would be worth reading seuk's website, especially if you're going to be buying a lot of G3 silver!

He's got a few threads on this site re the identification of contemporary counterfeits! Worth having that information up your sleeve!

There's also a few G3 halfcrown threads that are enlightening, if you can find them.

[Nek17 0]

Coin 7 VF (cleaned?)

Why 1818 onwards and not 1816 (as your interest)?

Many thanks Paul for your comment

For Coin 7 - it certainly looks very shiny, I am still trying to find a valid method to tell from: cleaned, AU/UNC grade. There are also many EF grades very shiny as well, puzzled.

For the 1816 question, since there is another much better known Nick in this forum with similar interest, so I just changed it from 1816 to 1818 to suit my newbie profile

[Nek17 0]

Would be worth reading seuk's website, especially if you're going to be buying a lot of G3 silver!

He's got a few threads on this site re the identification of contemporary counterfeits! Worth having that information up your sleeve!

There's also a few G3 halfcrown threads that are enlightening, if you can find them.

Many thanks!! Found SEUK's thread and digging in

http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6589&st=0&p=78630&hl=seuk&fromsearch=1entry78630

[Peckris 579]

It's very difficult to judge these coins independently as the pictures are all different size and quality, and we don't know the denomination in all cases (i.e. what would be marked down as wear on a shilling, would not be on a sixpence, as you wouldn't expect as much detail on a sixpence). A few coins also look 'buffed' in that they display fine hairline marks that are a clear sign of cleaning attempts. However, given all that, and grading purely for wear, nothing else, these are what I came up with:

1 AVF/VF

2 GF/AVF

3 EF

4 GVF

5 weak EF (EF from the ribs on the laurel leaves on the obverse, but probably a weak strike)

6 NEF/GVF

7 EF+

8 FAIR+

I hope that helps.

[Nek17 0]

1 AVF/VF

2 GF/AVF

3 EF

4 GVF

5 weak EF (EF from the ribs on the laurel leaves on the obverse, but probably a weak strike)

6 NEF/GVF

7 EF+

8 FAIR+

I hope that helps.

Many thanks mate, just realized I should have named these coins clearly due to different wear spots:

Year Value

1 1888 4D

2 1888 1S

3 1888 2S

4 1818 6D

5 1818 2/6

6 1818 2/6

7 1818 6D

8 1818 6D

[Nick 329]

Coin7:

Obverse looks cleaned, but also looks to have the remnants of another numeral under the second one in the date (1 over 8 ?).

[Nek17 0]

Coin7:

Obverse looks cleaned, but also looks to have the remnants of another numeral under the second one in the date (1 over 8 ?).

That is quite interesting, it looks like a 9 to me - never noticed it! But 1898 is Vicky... I will go back and check other two sixpences to compare.

Thanks.

Edited March 14, 2013 by Nek17

[Nick 329]

Coin7:

Obverse looks cleaned, but also looks to have the remnants of another numeral under the second one in the date (1 over 8 ?).

That is quite interesting, it looks like a 9 to me - never noticed it! But 1898 is Vicky... I will go back and check other two sixpences to compare.

Thanks.

The numerals were punched in separately, so if the die sinker made a mistake - any overdate is possible.

[Peckris 579]

Coin7:

Obverse looks cleaned, but also looks to have the remnants of another numeral under the second one in the date (1 over 8 ?).

Now that I know it's a 6d, I would suggest it's better than EF - in fact, there is barely any sign of wear. The lack of detail is simply caused by trying to get too much design onto a small die, and is a common feature of the sixpence.

I at first thought the 'overdate' was just a toning spot, so I zoomed the screen and there definitely seems to be something there. It does look like a 9, though that's open to debate. Have you also noticed the right hand side of the second 8? It looks rather different from the left hand side.

[Nek17 0]

Coin7:

Obverse looks cleaned, but also looks to have the remnants of another numeral under the second one in the date (1 over 8 ?).

Now that I know it's a 6d, I would suggest it's better than EF - in fact, there is barely any sign of wear. The lack of detail is simply caused by trying to get too much design onto a small die, and is a common feature of the sixpence.

I at first thought the 'overdate' was just a toning spot, so I zoomed the screen and there definitely seems to be something there. It does look like a 9, though that's open to debate. Have you also noticed the right hand side of the second 8? It looks rather different from the left hand side.

I think I now need to do three things (after go home):

1. Buy a macro lense for my canon DSLR - I tried the 'water drop' trick using my iPhone last night but did't work

2. Compare the 3 1818 6D I have and check the dates details

3. Send this one to CGS for their opinion, not sure if they will reject it after two second coz the doubt about being cleaned...

Will report here later.

[Nek17 0]

Reading on so many threads about fakes - courtesy to SEUK, Nck, Coinery ... really grateful seeing experienced lads do care about the situation and reported the items, so fewer newbies like myself won't fall right into the shiny traps, but why, why for so many dates outtathere I chose some heavily infected year i.e. 1818 I meant to minimize the risk of buying counterfeits. I don't think I fall into obvious fakes (based on coins above ) , just a bit struggling with grading and check cleaning details ATM.

[Nek17 0]

[Nick 329]

The numerals were punched in separately, so if the die sinker made a mistake - any overdate is possible.

Nick, I have checked the date, there is no overstrike, just some shade during scan

On several occasions I've convinced myself that I have an overdate from a digital photograph, only to find when looking at the raw coin under a strong magnifier that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever.