Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.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.

Coin Publications on Facebook


The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/22/2021 in all areas

  1. 8 points
    Just arrived - 1918-KN. A nice addition to my George V penny set
  2. 7 points
    Just picked up this sixpence. Common coin of course but the toning is quite nice.
  3. 6 points
    Just received this Halfpenny as an upgrade - 1860 and I believe 1+A - F258. Interesting web of die cracks on the obverse:
  4. 6 points
  5. 5 points
  6. 5 points
    Very pleased to have obtained an UNC 1854 PT penny with considerable lustre. 1854's often seem to turn up quite scruffy looking. This one is an exception. I don't think my pics do justice to the lustrous appearance, so I've also included a link to it, which shows the coin as it actually appears in hand.
  7. 5 points
  8. 4 points
    Michael Gouby has recently sent me pictures of an 1860 F10 with an interesting variation on the reverse. There are 2 additional lines to the border of St Andrew's cross in the top left quadrant of Britannia's shield. They seem to be too accurately placed to be the result of a die clash and Michael has asked collectors to check their reverse D pennies for any further instances. I have checked all mine and can't find any. Michael (and I) will be interested to learn of any additional examples.
  9. 4 points
    Definitely in that condition. Of course the great thing about it being in that mint state is that you know immediately the H hasn't been worn or tooled away.
  10. 4 points
  11. 4 points
    That compares nicely to the one I got off Richard last year. 😊
  12. 3 points
  13. 3 points
    It's on the same theme as that one of David Cameron:-
  14. 3 points
    A cat that's just eaten a crow?
  15. 3 points
    For completion's sake, a pair of RM products, the 1867 bronzed proof and the 1879 toned bronze proof clearly shows the uniformity achieved with bronzing compared to the toning variation seen on the second coin. As stated earlier, when there is full original lustre, the copper (or bronze) attribution is unambiguous, but the main thing to look for is the evenness of colour/toning. Copper can tone in a multitude of ways. Bronzing reduces its ability to do so. Hope this helps.
  16. 3 points
    Ha, yes Indian coins were something else. The following list if coins were still all being produced in the time of George VI. Amazing to think that twelfth Annas were being minted, and there are 16 Annas to a Rupee.........the Rupee itself now worth slightly less than the UK new penny. 1/12 Anna 1/2 Pice = 1/8 Anna 1 Pice = 1/4 Anna 1/4 Anna 1/2 Anna 1 Anna 2 Annas = 1/8 Rupee 1/4 Rupee 1/2 Rupee 1 Rupee
  17. 2 points
    An 1882 F115 with apparently no H was sold by London Coins in 2014
  18. 2 points
    hmmm....well...probably, but in essence the jury's still out.
  19. 2 points
    Just watched the unc 1882 F112 sell for £30,000 plus commission !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  20. 2 points
    Absolutely right Mike - that's why I posted it !!!
  21. 2 points
    That's all very true .. but if they said 7.5 cm of rain instead of 3 inches, then you'd know it REALLY pissed it down!
  22. 2 points
    The US used 16 fl oz to the pint, hence the pint/quart /gallon being .83 of the size of the UK equivalents. The one thing with Imperial is that it evolved to fit humans- some measurements like rainfall end up with double or even triple figures, difficult to envisage, when using millimetres, whereas "Bloody hell, we had 3 inches of rain yesterday" makes sense, especially when the exact amount is not important. '75mm' means '75mm', whereas '3 inches' can often mean an amount that just looks about right, but may be actually 2 3/4" or 3 3/8", but who cares? '75mm' is what a person running a weather station would say, but '3 inches' simply means it pissed it down. You have to look beyond the figures, and how the units relate to people.....:-)
  23. 2 points
    At the behest of your suggestion, I tried both. I got much further with Peck than Google, although still not clear what precise chemical agent was used, or exact procedure followed, to bronze the copper. But here is what Peck says at page 220 (last paragraph) of the 1964 re-print:- Not 100% crystal clear whether Peck was referring to currency pieces which had toned down, or to copper proofs. If currency pieces then other features can mark out the distinction between them and a proof. In the case of KP31, P1326, for example, the fact that the 0 of the date is incomplete and the 1 has no base serif. Also, the reverse is not inverted, which it is on the currency strike. Peck continues:- Rather an obvious point but worth repeating. At page 405, Peck states:-
  24. 2 points
    Certainly not Republican. I think it is Commodus as Augustus, 177 to 192 AD. Legend is one of three variations similar to M COMM ANT P FEL AUG BRIT, types L M and N in Sear. I can't be sure of the reverse - there are lots where there is some God or other standing and holding various items with long and complicated legends around the edge. Legend ends COS III I think, but Sear does not list all of the variations. It could be S5654 - Libertas holding pileus and sceptre - or similar.
  25. 2 points
    The assumption is that the cataloger got it correct. Granted that they have MUCH MORE experience than I have, and I am loathe to dispute their attribution, but we all know that mistakes occur. Caveat emptor.