Another Suspect Gold Sovereign - 1925-S Sydney Mint

[LawrenceChard]

Just recently, I got asked for an opinion on this:

Another Suspect Gold Sovereign - 1925-S Sydney Mint

Reverse, above, looks quite good.

The obverse has a few suspicious features.

Niton XRF test looks within range

913+4 = 917, so that's OK

Anybody notice anything else?

What about that weight? 7.9964 grams.

And before anyone asks for a serration count:

120

I just know someone is going to ask how many on a normal 1925-S!

What do you think?

Answers on a £20 note please!

😎

 

Edited May 22, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[dicker]

The horse’s stomach just seems to melt into the field with no definition.  The horse has been emasculated to an extent!

There are raised areas on the bottom of the neck line to the left of the BM.  Looks odd 

Field to the left of the beard is a bit scratchy

best

Dicker

[GoldDiggerDave]

George had lost one of his legs. 

[papi1980]

1 hour ago, LawrenceChard said:

Just recenlty, I got asked for an opinion on this:

Another Suspect Gold Sovereign - 1925-S Sydney Mint

Reverse, above, looks quite good.

The obverse has a few suspicious features.

Niton XRF test looks within range

913+4 = 917, so that's OK

Anybody notice anything else?

What about that weight? 7.9964 grams.

And before anyone asks for a serration count:

120

I just know someone is going to ask how many on a normal 1925-S!

What do you think?

Answers on a £20 note please!

😎

 

Thank you Lawrence. I think that 107 should be good for 1925:) 

[sovereignsteve]

👎

[Bruce06]

Weak horse mane n stomach details, weird especially when other details are so good. a good training lesson.

 

[SidS]

16 hours ago, dicker said:

The horse’s stomach just seems to melt into the field with no definition.

It was a warm day...

[LawrenceChard]

On 19/05/2022 at 16:27, LawrenceChard said:

Just recently, I got asked for an opinion on this:

Another Suspect Gold Sovereign - 1925-S Sydney Mint

Reverse, above, looks quite good.

The obverse has a few suspicious features.

Niton XRF test looks within range

913+4 = 917, so that's OK

Anybody notice anything else?

What about that weight? 7.9964 grams.

And before anyone asks for a serration count:

120

I just know someone is going to ask how many on a normal 1925-S!

What do you think?

Answers on a £20 note please!

😎

 

 

On 19/05/2022 at 18:23, papi1980 said:

Thank you Lawrence. I think that 107 should be good for 1925:) 

Quite right as far as 1925-L is concerned.

Genuine and fake 1925-L serration count comparison:

But it might be different for 1925-S,

I have asked for a serration count shot of one, and will post it here when done.

😎

 

[LawrenceChard]

On 19/05/2022 at 16:27, LawrenceChard said:

Just recently, I got asked for an opinion on this:

Another Suspect Gold Sovereign - 1925-S Sydney Mint

Reverse, above, looks quite good.

The obverse has a few suspicious features.

Niton XRF test looks within range

913+4 = 917, so that's OK

Anybody notice anything else?

What about that weight? 7.9964 grams.

And before anyone asks for a serration count:

120

I just know someone is going to ask how many on a normal 1925-S!

What do you think?

Answers on a £20 note please!

😎

 

 

On 19/05/2022 at 17:26, dicker said:

The horse’s stomach just seems to melt into the field with no definition.  The horse has been emasculated to an extent!

There are raised areas on the bottom of the neck line to the left of the BM.  Looks odd 

Field to the left of the beard is a bit scratchy

best

Dicker

 

On 19/05/2022 at 17:36, GoldDiggerDave said:

George had lost one of his legs. 

 

On 19/05/2022 at 18:23, papi1980 said:

Thank you Lawrence. I think that 107 should be good for 1925:) 

 

On 19/05/2022 at 23:17, sovereignsteve said:

👎

 

On 20/05/2022 at 01:13, Bruce06 said:

Weak horse mane n stomach details, weird especially when other details are so good. a good training lesson.

 

 

On 20/05/2022 at 10:07, SidS said:

It was a warm day...

There is an elephant in the room, which nobody has yet commented on.

Apart from it being slightly overweight as shown on the Niton XRF test result...

???

😎

 

[dicker]

Copper, rather than silver

[SidS]

Were there 1925-S sovereigns?

[LawrenceChard]

6 minutes ago, dicker said:

Copper, rather than silver

Exactly right!

Any idiot could use a Niton XRF machine, if they had access to one, and conclude that the gold content was correct. What else matters?

Well, back in those days (1925), it would be very rare indeed to find any gold sovereign with no silver content. There are some people who still don't know this, possibly including most of the decision makers, or others, at the Royal Mint, who still persist in insisting that "Crown Gold", including sovereigns is an alloy of 91.66% gold, and 8.33% copper.

I have mentioned this error to numerous people at the Royal Mint, but it is difficult to find out who could, would, and should reconsider their policy, and correct it. However, this is not the best place for yet another rant at the RM.

There is at least one "bullion dealer" I can think of who would conclude this coin is genuine, based on the Niton result.

I should probably retest the coin, noting the 4 places figures, which may just shown some traces of silver. The coin does look quite yellow despite its apparent lack of any silver, so I would guess at about 0.5 parts per thousand of silver, which may be enougn to affect the colour.

Well done to @dicker for spotting this!

😎

[LawrenceChard]

29 minutes ago, SidS said:

Were there 1925-S sovereigns?

Not an entirely stupid question, as counterfeiters do sometimes make "copies" of non-existent date-mintmark combinations, but a bit lazy.

It's easy enough to check. Although I knew the answer, I Googled 1925-S, and the first result was for this page:

https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/1925sovereign.html

of one of our heritage sites, which was designed to inform and educate as much as to sell.

I am happy to see this site still pulling its weight, even though it is now in its 22nd year, and so is almost medieval in internet terms. This is despite it not being "mobile friendly", or having some of the more modern html code features which Google now rewards. Quality still counts!

As the page shows:

1925

S

Almost Unc, edge knocks

Yes

£395

$585

So, yes it does exist.

Of course, you could have checked in Spink, Marsh, Coin Year Book, or other places, but Google is faster if you have internet access.

😎

 

[SidS]

Yeah I was just being lazy. My internet is very slow today!

[dicker]

@LawrenceChard It does look a great deal more gold than the post 2000 monstrosities.  Given the content, I would expect it to be slightly more coppery - but always hard to tell from a photo.

Best

Dicker

[LawrenceChard]

22 minutes ago, dicker said:

@LawrenceChard It does look a great deal more gold than the post 2000 monstrosities.  Given the content, I would expect it to be slightly more coppery - but always hard to tell from a photo.

Best

Dicker

Our photos are quite faithful in their colour rendition. Doug a.k.a. @SemolinaPilchard is very good at his attention to detail, including calibration of monitors, control of lighting, and other important stuff.

😎

[LawrenceChard]

Serration count comparison:

Both genuine and fake have 120 serrations.

We previously noted that genuine 1925-L London Mint sovereigns have 107 serrations, although I ought to look for an original 1925 produced low-rim version and get a serration count for it, as it may differ from the restrike high-rim versions.

😎

Edited May 30, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[papi1980]

Appreciate Lawrence! So far, serration data could be useful to track fakes, but not in all cases, probably should be used in combination with other things…It is interesting that the fake 1925 is a tone yellower than the original one despite the copper mix..

[LawrenceChard]

1925-SA Obvious fake sovereign, Pretoria Mint South Africa:

Although the SA mintmark has not shown clearly on the photo.

Fake 1925-SA Obverse 

Fake 1925-SA Obverse Niton Test Results

Overweight!

Au (gold) too low

Ag (silver) too high

Fake & Genuine 1925-SA Reverse Comparisons

Fake & Genuine 1925-SA Serration Count Comparisons

Fake = 102 serrations

Genuine = 121 serrations

"1925 FAKE full sovereign 102 squared off serrations - Lawrence Chard.  Both Shawn and I are quite confident we'd have spotted this one"

😎

[papi1980]

A question that probably has been answered before, but why the people who made the fake 1925 Sov did not bother to make the serrations properly on the reverse (as per the magnified photo section)? Not the count but the overall graving. Obverse is also bad, but reverse serration is awful…Is to laziness or just too hard to manufacture? 

Edited May 30, 2022 by papi1980

[SidS]

10 minutes ago, papi1980 said:

A question that probably has been answered before, but why the people who made the fake 1925 Sov did not bother to make the serrations properly on the reverse (as per the magnified photo section)? Not the count but the overall graving. Obverse is also bad, but reverse serration is awful…Is to laziness or just too hard to manufacture? 

I suppose it depends upon when they were made and where they were made. Many were probably made in the 1950s in the Middle East.

[LawrenceChard]

On 30/05/2022 at 21:32, papi1980 said:

A question that probably has been answered before, but why the people who made the fake 1925 Sov did not bother to make the serrations properly on the reverse (as per the magnified photo section)? Not the count but the overall graving. Obverse is also bad, but reverse serration is awful…Is to laziness or just too hard to manufacture? 

I really don't know or understand why counterfeiters pay such lack of attention to detail, perhaps just laziness.

[SidS]

23 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

I really don't know or understand why counterfeiters pay such lack of attention to detail, perhaps just laziness.

I suspect, but it is only conjecture on my part, that some of these mid-20th century fakes weren't actually made to con collectors.

There was a great deal of demand in the Middle East for sovereigns either for store of wealth or for trade, but the earlier sovereigns were growing scarcer. So a lot of 'sovereigns' were made about right, the overall look, weight and gold content - a bit like in the East they still happily buy and sell "jewellery sovereigns" - i.e. knock offs that look a bit right, but not much. 😁 

That's one of the reasons why the Gillick series came about, to address the great demand for sovereigns, but the short supply.

The Chinese Universal Numismatic Trading Society however are outright trying to fool collectors.

Edited June 3, 2022 by SidS
Spellings

[LawrenceChard]

25 minutes ago, SidS said:

I suspect, but it is only conjecture on my part, that some of these mid-20th century fakes weren't actually made to con collectors.

There was a great deal of demand in the Middle East for sovereigns either for store of wealth or for trade, but the earlier sovereigns were growing scarcer. So a lot of 'sovereigns' were made about right, the overall look, weight and gold content - a bit like in the East they still happily buy and sell "jewellery sovereigns" - i.e. knock offs that look a bit right, but not much. 😁 That's one of the reasons why the Gillick series cane about to address the great demand for sovereigns but the short supply.

The Chinese Universal Numismatic Trading Society however are outright trying to fool collectors.

Probably about right on all points.

😎