Canadian Silver Dollars. SWL, ARN?

ajaan

ajaan

Any help?

coinkat

I believe the 1950 and 51 have SWL designations and I believe in recent years a SWL designation was extended to 1946 and 1954- perhaps others. The second image has the better shot at arn status but I don't think either will get the designation. I see both as SWL varieties that may have a slight variation based on the date. Please consider waiting to hear from others here in order to gain a more representative opinion.

YQQ

Don, IMO these are both NOT ARN.

1 has 4 WL with the 4th only slightly showing . maybe a grease filled die

2 is short WL with the 4th also very slightly showing.

IMO these are both not ARN.
I am aware that some TPG's might "rule" differently, especially on #2.

YQQ

I have no idea WHY the type comes out extremely large above, as we have no influence on type size.
Have tried everything to undo this, but, no go it appears.

DBM

SWL; 3 or 4 waterlines none of which touch the canoe
ARN: 1950-51; 1 1/2 short waterlines
1st coin is SWL
2nd coin is ARN

syl

Since the SWL issues are all due to overpolished dies, there are varying degrees of what constitutes a SWL or ARN now, from what I hear and read. It's not a variety that can be distinguished by it's either there or it's not... the waterlines grow or shorten as to how much polishing has been done. I think that the TPG's are getting very liberal on what it takes to be regarded as a SWL, as well as the years involved. I think that the general feeling is what DBM says above

ajaan

Thanks all.

YQQ

do not agree with #2 being ARN for sure as the 4th WL is slightly visible. would never buy or sell it as ARN.