Gold Sovereign Thickness

[Mcgrimes]

All

Id be grateful for a bit of advise on sovereign thickness. Having received 2 from BC, they seemed different to previous coins.

These 2 coins seem to be the most of out centre sovereigns I’ve ever had? I’ve had a few, and they all vary in thickness around the edge, from 1.51mm to 1.75mm, but these are up to 1.85mm. The weight and diameter come in fine. Any feedback on the below pictures would be helpful.

The first 2 are close ups of the BC coins, and the third is a HB coin on the top against the BC coins. All I’m after is bullion, so not too concerned about any numismatic values

[ilovesilverireallydo]

1 hour ago, Mcgrimes said:

up to 1.85mm. The weight and diameter come in fine. Any feedback on the below pictures would be helpful.

Well their own COA says 1.52mm so I would be worried. Its hard to tell thickness if you take photos from the top. Try side profiles. Also how does it compare to HnB one? If they are different I would be worried. 

[PansPurse]

I'd suggest doing a specific gravity test, easiest way to be sure that the density is right (fakes made from a less dense metal will, by necessity, be thicker to make up the weight)

[Pete]

Where are you measuring thickness ?
Avoid making measurements around the rim as often there is a higher than normal thin edge which would rapidly wear down if the coin was handled.
You need to take centre thickness but precise measurement is impossible due to an uneven surface ( cameo ).
I suggest using a micrometer if you have one and take several measurements in different places working out an average but never on the rim itself.

[ceegold]

If you have a sovereign from the Buckingham Collection it is a major rarity

[silenceissilver]

5 hours ago, PansPurse said:

I'd suggest doing a specific gravity test, easiest way to be sure that the density is right (fakes made from a less dense metal will, by necessity, be thicker to make up the weight)

I second that, I have measured the dimensions of a half Sovereign with a calliper and thought, it's hard to measure due the reasons described by @Pete but it seems to be within the tolerance - till I made a specific gravity test. At that point I only had one half Sovereign and a few full Sovereigns, so I thought, maybe a gravity test is not that precise for a half Sovereign - so later I had it tested at a dealer with an x ray and it turned out to be 18K instead of 22, the gravity test had been correct and indicated that.  Thus I think it's impossible to identify a proper fake with measuring the dimensions. Particularly if you only buy bullion, a gravity test is the way to go, together with a big neodymium magnet, if you are not prepared to spend  more than an ounce of gold worth for a proper metal verifier.

 

[Mcgrimes]

8 hours ago, Pete said:

Where are you measuring thickness ?
Avoid making measurements around the rim as often there is a higher than normal thin edge which would rapidly wear down if the coin was handled.
You need to take centre thickness but precise measurement is impossible due to an uneven surface ( cameo ).
I suggest using a micrometer if you have one and take several measurements in different places working out an average but never on the rim itself.

It might be this, Ive been measuring around the rim. 

Ill get a specific gravity test done, this seems like a good idea. 

Ill get some more pictures up shortly just to try and demonstrate them.

Colour, detail and diameter seem fine, but they just seem the most out of centre I’ve seen with a higher rim.

[Cornishfarmer]

It could be poor picture but I don’t like the look of them. Go somewhere to get tested you don’t want some alibaba coins when paid for the real  deal.    But it could just be the picture

[Mcgrimes]

1 hour ago, Cornishfarmer said:

It could be poor picture but I don’t like the look of them. Go somewhere to get tested you don’t want some alibaba coins when paid for the real  deal.    But it could just be the picture

They just looked off when I saw them - and I assure you I’m no expert.

@BackyardBullion - do you have a fancy machine?  

[silenceissilver]

2 hours ago, Mcgrimes said:

They just looked off when I saw them - and I assure you I’m no expert.

@BackyardBullion - do you have a fancy machine?  

I have a fancy machine.

If you pay the postage for both ways, I can test it for you. The first time is for free, then I will make a business out of it😀

I have to say though, it's really not that difficult to make a specific gravity text. All you need is a scale that measures down to a 100th of a gram which you can get for £20, a thin thread and a suitable (light) cup of plastic (as at least my scale has a maximum limit of 200 grams). You measure the weight of the coin, then you put the cup of water on the scale, put it on zero have the coin on the thin thread (that's the most tricky part, but manageable) plunge it in so that it doesn't touch the cup on the bottom or the side and divide the results to each other and then you compare that to the density 22k gold with the rest being copper, should have.

The reason I sill bought this machine - I want even more security and I got sick of the specific gravity tests after each new Sovereign, plus it's not advisable with numistmatic Sovereigns.

[ceegold]

My guess is the thickness figure mentioned will be the thickness of the blank before it has been struck but as I say its only a guess.

[silversurf]

This is my 150 year old fancy machine lol.... does the business though 👍

Available for around £40

[sovereignsteve]

1 hour ago, silversurf said:

his is my 150 year old fancy machine lol.... does the business though 👍

Looks to be a lot of spare room around that sovereign. It would be interesting to do some measurements on these old scales and see just how accurate they were.

I would guess not that very; probably didn't need to be back then and wear and tear would have an effect too.

[silversurf]

1 hour ago, sovereignsteve said:

Looks to be a lot of spare room around that sovereign. It would be interesting to do some measurements on these old scales and see just how accurate they are.

Interesting point l see what you mean from the photo, Took some measurements with some calipers and it came in at 22.2mm, so 0.15 mm bigger then actual Sov. I guess the diameter on the scales is always going to be slightly larger to allow the coin to be placed quickly and with ease, however it is only one part of three tests for width, weight and thickness.

As a quick cheap way of telling the good from the bad I think it still does the job, even after all these years. A fake Sov I bought (deliberately) failed on the weight, but passed on width and thickness so job done.

Plus they're a lot easier on the eye then a scanner 😁😁😁

[Murph]

I see someone on ebay selling what I assume may be a ferrocell and a magnet as a tester.

I don't know how well this would work but goldlock doesn't charge that much for the complete tester.  

Buying a ferrocell from ferrocell.us wouldn't be any cheaper.

 

Maybe someone here has played around with ferrocells or making them and could comment?

 

Has anyone tried the test with a magnet on a plastic spacer placed on a zeroed scale and then the coin suspended above this to see if it attracts or repels the magnet.  This is supposedly to tell you if the coin is paramagnetic or diamagnetic.  I don't know if it would have a measurable effect with a small coin?

Would the scales read a positive value if the coin and magnetic repel each other and a negative if they attract or would the attraction be so small as to be hardly measurable?

 

[HighlandTiger]

6 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

Looks to be a lot of spare room around that sovereign. It would be interesting to do some measurements on these old scales and see just how accurate they were.

I would guess not that very; probably didn't need to be back then and wear and tear would have an effect too.

You may find this interesting, as it has been done. This is from a little book on Sovereign Balances by Michael A Crawforth