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

   Rotographic    

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.

Bronze & Copper Collector

Accomplished Collector
  • Content Count

    1,295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Posts posted by Bronze & Copper Collector


  1. Here is a comparison of both 3's... I was not aware of another variety.....

    post-443-1157146565_thumb.jpg

    There were only 2 varieties listed in the 2005 edition, I don't have the 2006 to compare it to...

    Re: the Freeman numbers.... I had noticed in the earlier edition a confusion due to the order of the listings as well as an apparent mislettering of the reverses.... possibly due to using the 1970 edition... there were some changes made in the 1985 edition.....


  2. Here's hoping that someone can help me out....

    I have a 1967 penny struck on a 6.3 gram planchet... smaller than a penny planchet and larger than a half penny planchet

    It appears to be 28-29 mm in diameter.... also slightly thinner (maybe 3/4 normal ??)

    See attached scans.... one each of obverse & reverse... the 3rd is of a normal penny on the bottom, this coin in the middle, and a normal half penny on top....

    I would assume that this coin was struck on a planchet intended for a foreign coin that was being struck at the Royal Mint.... Does anyone have any ideas as to what this planchet was originally intended for????

    Thanks

    post-443-1156571414_thumb.jpg post-443-1156571439_thumb.jpg post-443-1156571452_thumb.jpg


  3. I'm not sure if I have attrributed these correctly, but one sure looks blunter than the other....

    I think I have types 1, 2 and 4

    see attached scans......

    opinions????

    I'll list them in separate posts as the names and attributions are not apparent....

    I've edited the images with the type so that you can see which I think is which.....

    post-443-1154015522_thumb.jpg

    post-443-1154015531_thumb.jpg

    post-443-1154015541_thumb.jpg


  4. I have seen and/or owned a few (2 or 3) examples of Obverse 5 WITHOUT the flaw.... ALL were 1860 however......

    Freeman even mentions that MOST obverse 5's exhibit this flaw.... (most NOT all)

    Possibly the flaw developed early in 1860 and carried on into 1861???? a weak premise that an unflawed obverse 5 from 1861 would easily disprove.....


  5. I believe I might have found a lower grade, yet identifiable Obverse 6, Reverse B Half Penny......

    Freeman does not list an Obverse 6 for 1860, although Iain Dracott does mention a specimen (listed as Unique)....

    I have attached images for your perusal......

    Obviously still not as good as direct examination, yet I believe it is clear enough......

    Possible, although the only clear incuse lines are on the bottom 4th. The flaw in the forehead also raises questions as this is obv. 5. Do you have a well struck mint state obv.6 to compare with? I only have an EF and on that piece, although it fits obv. 6 in all other respects there is no sign of incuse lines for the leaf vein at all on the upper leaf of the 4th group. There is however a trace of raised leaf vein - sort of obv.5 3/4 if you see what I mean. There is only a trace of wear to the highest points and none on that leaf, so rubbing isn't the problem.

    True enough, but I am reasonably sure that this is NOT an Obverse 5 because it does not have the scalloped top middle leaf that EVERY Obverse 5 (flawed or not- I have seen examples of both) that I have seen exhibits, and that I have NEVER seen on any obverse other than an Obverse 5..... (see scan)...

    Unless of course, this is some interim Obverse 6 variant, that eventually became the obverse 6 in 1861.... I don't have the obverse 6 coin mentioned in Iain Dracotts article for comparison..... It's possible that it is some sort of hybrid obverse spanning the 2 years (1860-1861)

    I would certainly suspect that this coin is closer to the Obverse 6 than to any other obverse, so given the information available, and the condition of the coin, I think that I would have to classify it as an Obverse 6 (maybe with an asterisk denoting it as a possible minor variant or precurser to the accepted obverse 6)

    And again, photographs can not substitute for direct examination....

    post-443-1152025083_thumb.jpg

    post-443-1152025106_thumb.jpg


  6. I believe I might have found a lower grade, yet identifiable Obverse 6, Reverse B Half Penny......

    Freeman does not list an Obverse 6 for 1860, although Iain Dracott does mention a specimen (listed as Unique)....

    I have attached images for your perusal......

    Obviously still not as good as direct examination, yet I believe it is clear enough......

    post-443-1151998296_thumb.jpg

    post-443-1151998400_thumb.jpg

    post-443-1151998462_thumb.jpg


  7. Having acquired and assimilated Colin Adams' library following his half crown sale last December, I now have the attached list of books and other items for disposal. There are more to follow. I haven't had time to price them, but a general guide would be the low end of normal commercial prices. Sorry I can't give things away, but I have to defray the not inconsiderable purchase cost.

    Colin was also a collector of banknotes, so a small number of related items are also available.

    Anyone interested in specific items please PM me. Thanks.

    PM left for you.....

    Thanks


  8. F-542 = 1880 5 & D Bronze Proof----- R-19 1970 Edition......

    According to Freeman the Obv 4 die was only used at the Heaton Mint in 1874.

    On this Die, the lower colon Dot after F:D: is only half a dot.

    Is this a distinguishing mark for this Obv Die?

    I have the second edition (1985) of Freemans book in which F542 is listed as "No specimen known", does anyone know what the F542 was listed as in the 1970 Edition?

    Cheers,

    Gary

    Both my F-525 and F-527 appear to exhibit this feature.......


  9. It's possible that they do it on some level to "hook people in".....

    However, I think a more important reason that auction houses might underestimate the estimates is that, when the final hammer price far exceeds the estimates, they can claim either "how hot the market is, it's a great time to sell", and also to claim how successful they are at sales/auctions/etc, and that THEY (the auctioneers) are the company that you should use......

    There are probably other aspects as well, but this, to me, is one of the most obvious....

    Incidentally, I feel that in the DNW sale today, some items went rather cheaply, and others brought a significant premium....... I do note however, that the TRUE CLASSIC RARITIES brought excellent prices.... which is how it should be..... Those are ALWAYS in demand......


  10. There is always the case of the 1963 proof 70 deep cameo slabbed by pcgs that sold for $40,250 in 2004

    Heritage

    http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/v...336&Lot_No=4944

    It subseqently developed spotting in the slab and was bought back by PCGS.......

    It's a HIGH premium for a common coin, just to say you have the finest known specimen...

    The grading fever can and does get out of hand all too often, but, as I have said before in other threads, certification does have its benefits, especially regarding detection of counterfeits and altered coins, something that occurs too often with rare date US coins, but not as predominent with GB coinage yet... a few dates not withstanding.....


  11. I had emailed the 3 sellers that I knew.... and also contacted ebay directly....

    They too contacted ebay......

    as of now, fast by ebay standards, the fraudulent seller is not-registered any more... and has no items for sale.....

    score one for the good guys........


  12. I've emailed ebay with several of the ripped-off links.. AND informed some of the sellers that their pictures had been ripped off and are being used fraudulently......

    I doubt that Ebay will do much on my information, but hopefully, after the genuine sellers complain, they will be removed....

    Let's see how promptly ebay reacts....

    Good rule of thumb: "If it seems to good to be true, it is"......

    Caveat Emptor..... Use common sense.....

×