Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world, established since 2014. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsor's topics (hidden to guests) for special deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking/collecting. 21,000+ forum members and 1 million+ forum posts. For the latest up to date stats please see the stats in the right sidebar when browsing from desktop. Sign up for FREE to view the forum with reduced ads. 

Does Perth Mint muck us around with the coin size of Lunar III or is the new size a well done reminescense to Lunar I ? ?


platinreloaded

Recommended Posts

Sorry for my bad Englisch in the tollowing you tube....

 So first some pictures of the new Lunar III 5 oz silver mouse and the old sized 5oz dog...

175201579_Gre.thumb.png.ca7512f3d0969dfc37ba975fa63a145f.png

There we can see, that the new 2 oz mouse has the same size as the 2000 Lunar I dragon and that the 5 oz mouses are a litte bit smaller than the dogs 

797557130_Lunar_I_und_III_Grenvergleich_033.thumb.JPG.53b0e9e7970e919715231aff76aa22ab.JPG

I put the mouse on the dog, so we can see the size difference  better. What do you think ? 

 295755096_Lunar_I_und_III_Grenvergleich_100.thumb.JPG.fbc1f7521a0358ceb7b5a1ccc75cd71d.JPG

 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All is good - They're both roughly 8,305 cubic mm's

 

S2 = 55.6mm Diameter, 3.42mm thick

S3 = 50.6mm D, 4.13mm thick

 

edit - I thought you meant at first that the coins were the same thickness but smaller, which made me worry!

 

For a coin you want to look at, I think a larger diameter and a thinner coin is better as it gives you a larger surface area to view the image / detail.  For bullion, I wouldn't mind either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the size of the diameter plays an essential role when I look at a coin. The Lunar I Proof coins are extremely sought after by collectors. Especially the 2 oz coins. This is not only due to the very low mintage of these rarities, but also because of the size and the appearance for the viewers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the first Lunar 2 I bought was a fake- I hadn’t seen the 45mm diameter on the spec sheet 🤦‍♂️. I’ve now collected the set (just waiting for my Tiger to turn up) and I love them. The designs make the most of the extra room and they are a good interference fit, in capsules, in 47mm Leuchtturn trays. I actually prefer them to the first series which despite the smaller size have lots of dead space and are in any case too expensive for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use