Are these Sovereigns worth Grading?

[Shinus73]

Although potentialy turnng myself into an outcast around these parts, I've finally given in to the feeling I've had for some time, which is that collecting Sovereigns doesn't do it for me.

Therefore, my remaining Victoria sovereigns are in the process of being sold. I decided that I would attempt to find a decent (graded) example of each monarch instead.

Going through what I have left, most are bullion, nothing more, but these two are slightly nicer.

Are they worth grading or are they not?

 

[JunkBond]

Jubilee looks too worn.

[ilovesilverireallydo]

I have concerns about that 1887. either its really really worn or its a cast copy. I suspect its a cast. 

[ilovesilverireallydo]

1. Letters look flattened
2. Hook nose
3. Those uplifted scratches
4. Severe loss of detail on chest

5. that brooch  placement looks too low. 

6. bow is completely flat






Compare to known genuine: 

[Kman]

not worth grading no 

[Shinus73]

3 minutes ago, ilovesilverireallydo said:

2. Hook nose


 

I did think the nose looked slightly odd, but have seen others the same.

[Shinus73]

5 minutes ago, Kman said:

not worth grading no 

That was my suspicion.

[ilovesilverireallydo]

1 minute ago, Shinus73 said:

I did think the nose looked slightly odd, but have seen others the same.

If you look at the chest and the nose - this is the detail that may have been lost in the casting - hence why its so "flat" almost the field of the coin. Being that worn into the coin to be perfectly smooth is odd IMHO. 

[Shinus73]

1 minute ago, ilovesilverireallydo said:

If you look at the chest and the nose - this is the detail that may have been lost in the casting - hence why its so "flat" almost the field of the coin. Being that worn into the coin to be perfectly smooth is odd IMHO. 

I'll swap you for that known genuine?

[ilovesilverireallydo]

Just now, Shinus73 said:

I'll swap you for that known genuine?

lol no

[Kman]

6 minutes ago, Shinus73 said:

I did think the nose looked slightly odd, but have seen others the same.

Where did you get it from? it's probably still 22ct gold so not the end of the world 

[richatthecroft]

I hope you don’t have a fake. 

I guess it’s personal choice in terms of what grade you would be happy with.  

I am currently attempting to put together a change of monarch/ portrait design of each monarch- I’m not too fussy about a top grade of each coin, but I wouldn’t be happy with a very low grade! But I just would like a nice example of each.

 I intend to grade all of my change of portrait Half’s- purely because I have several already graded- 1902 Proof, 1911 & 1937 Proof being the Highlights that I own- so why not continue to match the holders up. 

My problem is that some of my coins are graded NGC and some PCGS- frustrating! 

 

[Shinus73]

Just now, Kman said:

Where did you get it from? it's probably still 22ct gold so not the end of the world 

No idea now - it's probably one I bought when I first started stacking a decade ago.

[ilovesilverireallydo]

Just now, Shinus73 said:

No idea now - it's probably one I bought when I first started stacking a decade ago.

Its most likely one of those 22ct copies. I have see many jubilee fakes for some reason - especially shields which are 9ct and 14ct though. 

[Shinus73]

It was going on eBay,  but it seems that wouldn't be wise.

Off to Atkinsons instead, I guess they'll tell me what it is soon enough.

At least it confirms my decision to sell is the correct one - too much to know, too little time to learn.

Modern shiny proofs for me!

[goldmember44]

Ebay is flooded with fake sovereigns, unfortuntely.

[Seasider]

1 hour ago, Shinus73 said:

Off to Atkinsons instead, I guess they'll tell me what it is soon enough.

I guess we'll have to be careful about buying any 1887 sovereigns from Atkinsons for a while.😀

[Roy]

Snubbed nose 😁

[silenceissilver]

1 hour ago, ilovesilverireallydo said:

Its most likely one of those 22ct copies. I have see many jubilee fakes for some reason - especially shields which are 9ct and 14ct though. 

My first gold ever, an old head Victoria half Sovereign, turned out to be an 18 K copy.

[Murph]

The 'uplifted scratches' just look like die cracks to me.

 

As to grading I wouldn't bother with either as you can get unc or almost unc veiled heads fairly cheaply so unless it's a rarer type I doubt you'd easily recoup your costs.  Then again some people seem willing to pay quite a bit more for graded coins.  It just spoils your ability to hold and examine them for me.

[ilovesilverireallydo]

8 minutes ago, Murph said:

The 'uplifted scratches' just look like die cracks to me.

 

As to grading I wouldn't bother with either as you can get unc or almost unc veiled heads fairly cheaply so unless it's a rarer type I doubt you'd easily recoup your costs.  Then again some people seem willing to pay quite a bit more for graded coins.  It just spoils your ability to hold and examine them for me.

prominent die cracks of unrecorded varieties signal casted coins... 

[Murph]

27 minutes ago, ilovesilverireallydo said:

prominent die cracks of unrecorded varieties signal casted coins... 

Can you tell me where you found this information?  I know prominent scratches and marks that are identical because of them being on the coin used as a master signify fakes but I am unaware that die cracks could be introduced to a cast coin unless from the original coin.

Cracks are due to pressure and casting doesn't require any striking so you'd think they wouldn't be introduced.

I also wasn't aware anyone had attempted to catalogue die crack varieties of sovereigns.  Marsh doesn't seem to mention them.  Can you perhaps tell me where they are recorded for my future use?

[sixgun]

The 1887 coin is completely wrong. Send it back if you can.