| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,748 |
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
28 Posts |
Hi, I have recently come across a gold George III 1/2 sovereign 1790. I have a limited experience on these coins, still (I could be wrong) this one looks a tiny bit too small in diameter and the color seems a bit ' weak, washed out' for a gold coin. The thickness it's fine. I only have another similar coin and comparing the two I have noticed the difference in color and size. the 1790 weights 4.14 gr, the 1755 4.11 gr The caliper was lift a fraction on both after the measurement was taken According to a reference they should be the same in weight and size. I add a few images, maybe someone that knows about these type of coins can give a better assessment.     Thank you Edited by calinka
02/17/2016 6:33 pm
|
|
|
|
New Member
Netherlands
5 Posts |
The difference in weight is absolute minimal. The washed out tone of the 1790 half souvereign looks OK to me. Maybe a little less copper in the alloy? Nice coins.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
These are NOT half sovereigns; they are half guineas.
|
|
New Member
 United Kingdom
28 Posts |
Thank you Philip2. What it's bothering me most is the diameter, Almost a full mm. smaller than the specs. The thickness is the same, but with almost 1 mm. less in width the smaller coin is still heavier than the 1755. Comparing the coins between two equally distant straight lines (as you can see from the images),clearly shows the size difference. To be noted is that he 1755 has a creasing (originally love token?) that slightly changes the coin circumference, and the caliper measurements taken at different points are the average over 5 measurements,the 1790 does not look worn at all around the circumference edging.  The color near GEORGIUS looks odd? Is it still within normal parameters? Just curious Edited by calinka
02/18/2016 05:48 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
According to Coincraft 1998 Catalogue, the diameter of the Half Guinea can vary between examples from 20 to 21 mm, according to variety.
What bothers me, is the surface texture of this coin.
Could you please post an equivalent obverse picture of the 1755 coin, with exactly the same lighting conditions?
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
28 Posts |
Hi Sel_691, hope these images are good enough. Kept the same light and swap places (Sorry just noticed some fluff on the first picture - 1790 head) Color looks kind of painted by GEORGIUS,That shows more in the previous post picture and below GRATIA look at the last two pictures, as you can tell I am lost here.    Edited by calinka
02/18/2016 07:45 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
Unfortunately, the excellent picture of the individual obverse of the George 111 half guinea shows much more surface detail than the pictures showing paired obverses.
Still a bit hard to make a good comparison, in the knowledge of I have seen before.
In the paired pictures the coins look OK in comparison with each other, but the George 111 looks different in the individual picture, in terms of surface texture.
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
28 Posts |
Hi sel_691, thank you for your time, I guess that's not an easy task, as you said the images are not consistent enough for you to give a clear assessment. Have another image just in case it's helps. Thanks  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
This comparative picture suggests to my eye at least, that the
George 111 Half Guinea is quite OK.
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
28 Posts |
Well sel_69l thank you for your reassuring opinion, too many fakes nowadays.
Wouldn't have worried as much if it wasn't such a valuable coin.
Half Guinea, yes, :-) gotcha.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,748 |
|
Posted 02/18/2016 05:16 am
