Requesting some feedback on this coin (dialuppper advisory)

wybrit

I've been staring at this one for a while. I would like your opinions on this. Be brutally honest - I can still return it. Sorry for the big pics, dialuppers.

The 1922 is one of the scarcer dates of the series and this one has a pretty decent strike (given the usual out there), but that is all I will say...

spinaker2000

Tom, that looks about like my '22 as far as strike, but mine is browner. I'd put it in the 58-62 range.

coinpictures

Is the porousnous usual for this date? Is it really that scarce? Krause lists it the same as the other dates in the teens and twenties.

spinaker2000

Spink has UNC at 40£, EF at 8£.

wybrit

Is it really that scarce?

None of the dates are rare, but the 1922 is very hard to get in top grade.

Is the porousnous usual for this date?

I don't have a lot examples to say for sure, but I am wee bit skeptical about that. "Woodgrain" is not uncommon.

bosox

Tough one from the pics. I'd say 58-62 also, unless those are hairlines behind Georgie's head, then BB.

Aethelred

I am not over fond of that coin. I am bothered by the chatter, dig under Britannia's arm and what look like hairlines. I think the color is original, but to my eye that looks like a very high end AU (not that my eye has beenexposed to very many George V Halfpennies).

Garneteye

I think that you will be unhappy with the coin in the long run. First impressions are usually correct and if you are having second thoughts now.....

Dan

1jester

Yes, it does look to be hairlined, and possibly recolored. And not a true uncirculated, in my opinion, due to the slight rubs on the high points, though it might make it into a 62 holder on a good day. But what throws me for a loop is the apparant porosity, which might be an indicator of a pressure-cast fake. But it sure does look real, barring that!

oldshep

The pitting on both surfaces have the characteristic of a poor flan - appears there was gas causing the porosity. Just my opinion.

Shep

ajaan

<< <i>Requesting some feedback on this coin >>


Great Britain, halfpenny, 1922.

wybrit

ajaan:

As for everyone else, thanks for your inputs.

From the naked eye, the coin looks great, but under close inspection, there are a lot of problems you do not see in the seller's picture (admittedly, a pretty good picture, but small). ===> Link

Not only is there a touch of scuff on the high points on the obverse, I believe the porosity in Britannia's torso is from brushing. At some point, there was probably a corrosion spot there that had been brushed away. Under the scope, that area looks quite whizzed.

There are no classic hairlines, but the lines to the right of KGV are a concern. These lines are quite deep into the field and are not typical "flow lines."

The color is all wrong as well. The lustre's light reflection appears diffuse (reflecting in different directions) rather than specular (reflecting light in more or less the same direction).

All in all, not a great example, even though the naked eye indicated a good piece.

Jester, I believe the coin is genuine. There has been little reason to fake halfpennies of this era - all KGVs are worth less than $100 in top grade and had little buying power even during ajaan's childhood, when this was minted.

Here is the reverse from my current piece. I was hoping to upgrade because there is a flaw in the metal on Britannia's right arm just above the elbow.

ajaan

As an intelligent Arsenal supporter, I would pass on the coin but I could see a Chelsea lemming wanting it.

wybrit

Aethelred

I like the one you have much better than the new one!

ajaan

wybrit's posting in his sleep which is quite evident by the quality of his posts.

coinkat

I would like to see the reverse of coin II before rendering my thoughts. The first coin has an above average strike for the portrait, however, the reverse has issues. It is MS, but no higher than 62... mostlikely a 61.

The other would grade higher IMHO if the portrait strike is decent.

wybrit

wybrit's posting in his sleep which is quite evident by the quality of his posts.

Even in my sleep and with my typing at its worst, my posts far surpass yours for quality, old duffer!

wybrit

The obverse of coin II and the reason I wanted to improve my example. Note the bizarre bagmark at KGV's neck.

(I think you meant "obverse," coinkat, so here it is).

coinpictures

"Bagmark" ? Something that severe I call a SCRATCH...

wybrit

"If it talks like a duck," etc, etc.

It may look like one in 2-D, but it's not a scratch, that's the strange thing. The so-called scratch is not even continuous in spite of the picture suggesting otherwise. It looks like something may have adhered to the die or something. It's really an odd anomaly.

coinkat

Without a doubt, there was either thread or wire on the die and the impression on the coin was left. That is not a scratch

rhound1977

<< <i>I (not that my eye has beenexposed to very many George V Halfpennies). >>



Don't stick pennies in your eye, that hurts, Wybrit I like your original coin better than this one....