| Author |
 Replies: 36 / Views: 9,939 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
315 Posts |
As you can see it cant be a 1926 because it ends on the wrong side of the denticle.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
coinaus is correct, it's not a 1926. Incidentally there are actually two distinct 1926 reverses but neither of them match.
There is only one year in which 3 digits of the date match up with, anyone care to make additional guesses?
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
315 Posts |
Is it real in your opinion wwwwww. Oh my guess of the same date die would have been 28
Edited by coinsaus
04/13/2014 07:19 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
It's an altered date:
- as mentioned above, real 1923s have flat based letters.
- the 9 is rotated anti-clockwise slightly relative to the 2 when compared with genuine 1923s
- the central stroke of the 3 droops down (it's straighter on genuine 1923s)
- the lower stroke of the 3 curves up further than the 3 of a genuine 1923
- the top stroke of the 3 is fat, even worn 1923s have a noticeably thin top
It's not a 1928 either.
Edited by wwwww
04/13/2014 07:24 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Australia
1607 Posts |
That a hard one WWWWW,not sure but I think I remember reading that dies were sent from London to Melbourne in 1923 for the 23 & 24 coins,does it have anything to do with that ?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
It had me stumped for a while too because the accurate shape of the 2 made me assume it was from the 20s but it's actually form a 1933 die with the 3rd digit changed to a 2. Compare the final digit with the final digit of a 1933, it's a perfect match.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1607 Posts |
Yes I see now, the 3 starts at the right hand side of the denticle instead of the left on a genuine coin.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
75 Posts |
Quote:
It had me stumped for a while too because the accurate shape of the 2 made me assume it was from the 20s but it's actually form a 1933 die with the 3rd digit changed to a 2. Compare the final digit with the final digit of a 1933, it's a perfect match.
From what I have heard, the most common date alteration is to change the first 3 on a 1933 to a 2. This results in a coin where the 3 is in the wrong place and the reverse lettering has an indented base. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1040 Posts |
Quote:
From what I have heard, the most common date alteration is to change the first 3 on a 1933 to a 2. Everything has been tried,some more sucessful than others,since the rise of the Internet the Info. is out there so no excuse for lazy slabbers or pro graders. For the hobby collector on the Internet its best not to touch(IMO) 23 halves,there are just too many heavily disguised fakes out there. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1040 Posts |
Edited by Basil
07/21/2014 12:58 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote:Is this the same Coin?,if so its back on ebay. Not sure about being the same coin but it IS the same seller. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
750 Posts |
I think it may be a different coin. The pics are gone from the first one, although the slab apparently said F-12 (from the item description). This one says VG-8.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1607 Posts |
No it is not the same coin,at least IMO this one is genuine.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
852 Posts |
That last '23 has some serious issues that would bodybag it at the big 3.
Even if genuine and even if it was in a big 3 slab it isn't worth $895 unless it was say F15 or VF 20. There is a glut of genuine coins in lower grades so buy a better one for that kind of money.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1607 Posts |
I agree with that 100%, it is a troublesome looking coin & you could get a far better raw coin for that sort of money ?
|
| |
Replies: 36 / Views: 9,939 |
First Page
Posted 04/13/2014 06:19 am
