|
 Coinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers
since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like
Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.
 |
The current range of books. Click the
image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info
on coinpublications.com |
|
 Predecimal.com.
One of the most popular websites on
British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and
interesting information. |
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
Recently was pleased to pick up an example of the very rare W860 1/4d issued by the coiner T Pope & Co. of Birmingham. Later noticed that the name of "POPE" appears to have been crudely obliterated from the die - replaced by a random series of raised marks. I don't think this is merely damage to the token because the raised marks left look nothing like POPE. Alternative explanations most welcome !
-
The $64,000 question, Terry.
- Today
-
Yep, you're right. The one is definitely over a tooth. It just looked at first glance as though the P of Penny was to a gap not a tooth.
I need to get me teeth and gaps sorted.
-
Thanks Mike that's interesting , so his 1944 wide date example had a light finish to. Now I wonder which is most common the light or the dark. ??
-
Just from instinct and experience I'd say that was the later obverse and earlier reverse. I.e. one of the scarce combos.
-
I am no expert but its a F176.
First 1 of date to tooth ,no rim & sea intersects tooth 🙂
-
Jon, I know these are a sod to tell apart, but I think that may be a 177 - P of Penny to a gap and colon between GRA and BRITT to a tooth.
I hope one of the experts corrects me, I'm wrong, and it's a 175 or 176.
-
14 years later I know, but I use the same method as the guy in this video
-
Made me smile. Remember those innocent good old days, before the plague really took hold ⚰️ (couldn't find a perspex coffin)
-
Well, it was Jerry's photographic memory and the 1926 ME is not on my rare penny site, but otherwise, spot on, Eric 😄
-
Yes, almighty Rob is absolutely correct in this. I can't help but think of a few examples - the one that drives me crazy are the proofs (ie 1839, 1887, 1893) in silver and gold especially.
We see sky high prices for coins like the 1893 crown where we can see a "Deep Cameo" Proof 66 go for 10, 000 USD or above! etc, etc.
-
Good to know - thanks guys
-
The first failing can be used to advantage as I've had a few bargain die polishing 'details' coins in the past. The second point is high on their list of inconsistencies. Vast numbers seen in plastic have been dipped, but graded nonetheless. Graffiti is another bugbear as a scratched cross on a hammered coins is a problem sometimes, but not others.
-
Very interesting.
This particular variation is noted in the January 1971 edition of Coin Monthly. It's in an article entitled "Coin Varieties - pennies", by A,J.Braybrook, on pages 50 to 53.
"1944 light toned, waves clear of exergue, Second 4 points to middle of waves"
Here's a photo of the relevant bit:-
-
Yea, you may have a point there. The TPGs tend to be "technical" in their grading (when they are consistent), which is somewhat frustrating. You may recall I posted a while back a shilling 1863/1 that was absolutely struck to the"9"s with PROOFLIKE surfaces. There were hairlines but under micro these were die prep and raised and not on devices. No friction, no nicks, no anything.
First sent back for "cleaning" - it had been dipped, but they usually aren't bothered by such. It was and is magnificent - which is why I bought it. The second TPG sent it back as a "62". Yikes!
-
Thanks Vicky,
Not too worried about dipping as IMO any coin that ha been kept for a hundred years would have toned considerably. As for wear hard to say as previously stated the milling is pristine which is something that seems to be neglected in the grading process. However IMO something that should be taken in to consideration in the grading process as any wear will be recorded there. As for the grading IMO the 1918 is graded at MS 62 and I think the 1911 coin is of a higher grade.
-
OZ, IMO based on the photos there is a bit of friction at the cheekbone and eyebrow (common location for such). The field with som random marks. I think the strike very nice. IMO, coin looks to have been dipped and then likely retoned just a bit.
The strike very firm indeed, though the earlier KG5s not as poor as the later war year issues.
I would guess 62, but is a coin I would like to hold [carefully] and see directly.
-
Pete, you know, I am in the same place as you. I guess that I was a borderline fanatic at one time. If it was a rare DATE penny or milled silver 1830-1970 rarity, I was on it. Now, a bit of a ho-hummer.
At one time the upcoming Spink Waterbird Sale would have really gotten a charge out of me, and now I am just a bit interested . I suspect many of us have a mild version of the malady as well.
Anyway, again I like looking at this marvelous 1926ME and Richard's evidently photographic memory. Maybe I need to look again on his site at the '26ME's.
Cheers, gents (and ladies)!
-
-
-
The 1926 as the pictures are not mine i cant be certain but think so and would say yes and blackened later ,the others are just the CGS ones before grading and also blackened later.
-
Pete, do you know if the photos were taken with the coins on that black background or whether the background was blackened later ?
-
You have a good memory Jerry and yes ,its three and a half years ago now 🙂
-
That is wonderful Pete- is it the Colin Cooke one?
-
Three beauties there Pete, especially that ME.
-
Load more activity
