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.

Peckris

Expert Grader
  • Content Count

    9,800
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    53

Posts posted by Peckris


  1. www.jormoo.com wholesaler and Retail brand sport shoes .,such as Nike,Jordan(1-23),Jordan 9 Fusion,air force one,Jordans XX3 Sneakers,Jeans,Gucci shoes.Prada Shoes,t-shirts,Adidas Trainers shoes,Air Max Shoes,supra shoes,UGG boots, and so on.

    Welcome to visit us: http://www.jormoo.com

    I will buy a pair of Gucci shoes after you have bribed me with a VF 1905 halfcrown.

    No?

    P*ss off then you benighted kerb-crawler. :ph34r:


  2. Interesting replies guys. I must say, I had never seen it on 1919 pennies or earlier (but there it is...) and certainly not as late as 1953! (but there it is). I suppose the Mint could well have experimented with different bronze alloys from 1920, enthused by their efforts with the silver versions. Or maybe they simply changed the formula used to provide the lustre.

    There wasn't any darkening of pennies in the period afaik. The first was in 1934 I believe? Though they had certainly used it on farthings to great effect from 1897 to 1918.

    Scott, can you upload a scan of your 1935 ghosted reverse ? I've never seen George V ghosting post-modification - I'd be fascinated to see it.


  3. That's very true. I does seem to me as if the annual minting of circulating coinage is now more of a sideline for the mint rather than it's main job. Maybe i'm cynical?

    Well it's not so far-fetched - when you consider that the total value of coins in circulation represent, year-on-year, an ever-shrinking portion of the money supply, then it really is a matter of decreasing priority. Today's £10 note probably equates to a 1930s halfcrown in real terms.

    As for commemoratives, I recently bought (via eBay) a 'fantasy' proof penny of 1798, which featured the Kuchler George III obverse, and a Britannia reverse closely based on the pattern pieces of the Boulton era, minted on a heavy dark bronze flan. I don't usually go for those fantasy pieces, but I fell in love with this as soon as I saw it. They can do some things right, it seems.


  4. I expect many of you will already have noticed that the lustre on pennies between 1921 to 1926 is often very streaky, and can be a much paler colour too. Instead of wearing from the high points and then gradually disappearing until it lingers only in the legend, these pennies often show the lustre disappearing in streaks, totally unrelated to wear. The remaining lustre looks as though it's been applied with a paintbrush, with the streaks running in the same direction.

    Anyone ever heard an explanation of why this should be so? (It may be true of halfpennies too, but I don't see many with good lustre and those I do see don't seem to have this problem).

    post-4737-1249338118_thumb.jpg

    This penny is fairly typical I think.


  5. That joker is showing a scan of an obverse of a small proof 1993 10p and a large proof 10p reverse (date unknown). If you look at the border beads it should be clear enough. And the pictures are two different sizes anyway !!

    Sheesh. If you're going to be dishonest and rip everyone off, then at least do it properly ... :lol:


  6. I thought this was a commen occurance for gaming tokens ? The mispelling being so they could not be said to be counterfeiting.

    There aren't any gaming tokens featuring William III - they are mostly George III or Victoria, and made of brass.

    Misspellings are very common on these copper William III coins : there was a massive re-coinage taking place and coppers got a low priority - you don't see too many errors on the gold and large silver coins; they start appearing on shillings and sixpences, and there are lots on coppers.


  7. Looks a nice coin. The only wear I can see (but it is only a photo) is on Britannia's shoulder. The king's upper ear is not showing any sign of wear, so for me you may be looking GEF/EF. Just hope it hasn't been photoshopped...

    If you check out his other coins they are top-whack and mostly over-graded.

    Eg: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1887-VICTORIA-SILVER...id=p3911.c0.m14

    http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1849-VICTORIA-SILVER...id=p3911.c0.m14

    Are we talking at cross-purposes here? The nice 1912H is from mog461 not d-uk-e, and it's the latter who is being ... shall we say ... a bit optimistic. :o


  8. Just been looking through all the pennies on ebay, and after scrolling through quite a bit of dross, as well as some decent condition coins, I noticed that "H" pennies outnumber "KN" pennies in any condition, by about 5:1.

    It has to be said that the vast majority are well worn, but I did come across this nice example which I might bid on myself.

    There's another almost UNC one further on, as a buy it now for £299. The seller: Morgan9red. Mentioned before on here, I believe.

    That's a rather nice EF example - good luck with it. But I just had a look though morgan9red's listings, and I don't see either 1912H there. Weird.

    No, you're right. It was my error. The actual coin is here. The seller is d-uk-e. Don't know why I thought it was morgan9red. I did see his name, but it must have been another coin.

    I don't like that Unc example, not at that price. There's slight rubbing on both sides (A.Unc) and the lustre is patchy and uneven. For £299 I would be wanting a BU Gem.

    To be honest, in your position I would rather bid on other penny, which has a much more even and pleasing appearance (in my opinion.) It looks GEF to my eye.


  9. tn_IMG_3612.JPGtn_IMG_3613.JPG

    and yes this is one, was reading colin cookes site and said he had seen around 20 or so.

    perhaps this was one (i did get it in manchester)

    http://www.colincooke.com/coinpages/victcopperissue.html <--- the page the information about 1858 is on.

    i just wish to note another "feature" of 1858 SD farthings, the bead below the the last 8 is smaller

    and how much is this thing worth?

    click for bigger picture, some overstrikes of letters

    Interesting reading. And a nice rarity you have there scott.

    I would ask Neil Paisley about its value - their site might even make an offer! (Unlisted rarities are incredibly difficult to value. It's all down to interest in the end. Compare the 1804 Bank of England dollar with the 1860 bun penny - both have varieties that go from 'common' to 'extremely rare', yet the rare 1804s aren't much different in value from the common ones. Not like the 1860 penny.)


  10. Just been looking through all the pennies on ebay, and after scrolling through quite a bit of dross, as well as some decent condition coins, I noticed that "H" pennies outnumber "KN" pennies in any condition, by about 5:1.

    It has to be said that the vast majority are well worn, but I did come across this nice example which I might bid on myself.

    There's another almost UNC one further on, as a buy it now for £299. The seller: Morgan9red. Mentioned before on here, I believe.

    That's a rather nice EF example - good luck with it. But I just had a look though morgan9red's listings, and I don't see either 1912H there. Weird.


  11. I do not have CCGB 2009, but the same prices are given in CCGB 2008.

    Spink 2009 lists all three as: F - No price given; VF £1; EF £15; UNC (Full lustre)£50.

    Coin Yearbook (2008) also prices all three as: F £1; VF £4; EF £20; UNC £40.

    David

    Thank you David - I think it must be an error. It's not that 1886 is a 'deceptively difficult' date after all! I've got 3 or 4 of the damn things, all EF or better. I will have to tell Chris that in this instance, CCGB is wrong.


  12. Hi

    I'm just pricing up some coins for sale, but the latest copy of CCGB I have is 2007. In the bronze farthing listings I see ...:

    1884 F £1 VF £2 EF £4 UNC £15 BU £30

    1885 F £1 VF £2 EF £4 UNC £15 BU £30

    but ..

    1886 F £1 VF £10 EF £30 UNC £75 BU £90

    I feel this must be a typo, as 1886 farthings are equally common as 1885 in high grade, and possibly even commoner than 1884. Would someone be kind enough to check CCGB 2009 for me please, and check these prices?


  13. Yes fairly interesting I got my wires crossed earlier. The 1942 one is the thin 6d.

    The thinner one you can see on the scan is the 1942 one. Are all 1942 6ds the same though maybe I have found something of interest for all the 1942 coins or should they all be the same thickness as 1941 and others???

    Is it just a case of wear on the rim???

    Thoughts please. I would have thought it would take considerably more wear on the design to get down that far????

    Russ777

    Yes, you are right. It is just a case of wear on the rim. If you think about it, looking at the rim from the side is deceptive - when you look at a coin face on, you see how little it figures. Also, the 1942 6d is barely in Fine condition, the 1941 is VF which is a big difference.

    And when the rim wears, it loses a bit of metal, but also flattens it into the teeth, which makes it look wider from the front - you see that? So there will be very little difference in weight. It only really shows up if you look at it from the side, as you did.


  14. Yes fairly interesting I got my wires crossed earlier. The 1942 one is the thin 6d.

    The thinner one you can see on the scan is the 1942 one. Are all 1942 6ds the same though maybe I have found something of interest for all the 1942 coins or should they all be the same thickness as 1941 and others???

    Is it just a case of wear on the rim???

    Thoughts please. I would have thought it would take considerably more wear on the design to get down that far????

    Russ777

    Yes, you are right. It is just a case of wear on the rim. If you think about it, looking at the rim from the side is deceptive - when you look at a coin face on, you see how little it figures. The 1942 6d is barely in Fine condition, the 1941 is VF which is a big difference.

    And when the rim wears, it loses a bit of metal, but also flattens it into the teeth, which makes it look wider from the front - you see that? So there will be very little difference in weight. It only really shows up if you look at it from the side, as you did.


  15. Derek

    Colin Cooke have a nice Unc 1918kn at the moment, also three (!) 'Bu' 1912h. The website has been re-vamped and the pictures are much better.

    Glad to hear that you are an 'ordinary' collector with Vf's and Gvf's - like me!!!

    Btw, I bought your book - excellent.

    David

    Magnificent, and at £725, a mere snip here is the page it's on Needless to say, I can't afford it !!

    And he has (HAD) a 1933 penny !!!! Well, the Lavrillier pattern, but hey, it's still a 1933... wonder how much it sold for?

    That 1918KN is beautifully struck, but the colour looks faded (it's the picture I think). He also has some rather nice 1912H but the prices for those are somewhat overrated for a coin with a mintage of 16,000,000. But I suppose the demand for them is high just so that people can say "I've got a BU H penny!"

    I always found that GVF KNs were the hardest to come by. They were the highest grade I could afford but do you think I could ever find one??


  16. Am I correct than sixpences prior to 1946 are silver?

    I have a 1941 and 1942 pence they are both the same weight 2.8g

    The odd thing is that the 1941 is noticeably thinner and different tone to it.

    My question is were other metals used in the war period the 1942 one is almost double in thickness yet weighs the same..

    Thoughts please. Could I have a 1941 fake or mixed metal coin because the war was on??

    Russ777

    Not quite. Before 1947 they are silver (50%). So both yours should be silver. There was no other metal used except silver alloy, even during the war. You may have a fake, but the best thing is if you could scan it and upload pictures of it for us to see? (To be half the thickness but the same weight, it would have to be lead I would have thought!)


  17. The fact is, I've never seen a 1912/18/19H that wasn't nearly black, and I've never seen a KN that wasn't red/brown.

    And, I've never seen an Unc KN in the flesh, but the few pictures I've seen show a very flattened portrait, i.e. not well struck up. Much like my 1919H, which if you look at the legend, shield, etc, appears to have no wear at all, but has the hair detail you would expect on a coin that is about Fine. (And the coin is already a dark colour - almost like a Mint darkened penny but without that gorgeous purple sheen you see on the farthings.)


  18. For £500 I would want something a good deal clearer and better condition than this. Indeed, I paid less than this for my 1689 Halfpenny which is in better condition (and that isn't good!) and is a much more interesting coin than a threepenny bit.

    Would you buy ANY coin from someone who tells you that the "portrait of Queen Elizabeth" is "on the back" ?? :o

    As for the date - pffft - it's so obviously nineteen fifty squiggle. Doesn't everyone see that? :lol:


  19. Another factor may also be the different alloy used by the two mints : you'll have noticed I'm sure, that H pennies are usually darker and blacker in colour than usual, while the KN pennies are virtually always a reddish/brown colour. Maybe if the alloys were slightly harder, it wore the dies out faster.

    All interesting stuff. I think dies were used to death virtually everywhere in the period 1915-20 and the quality of the end product can be dreadful, and you may be right that the two private mints tried to eke every bit of use out of their dies, just to make that tiny bit of extra profit.

    I also have a theory though that the alloys scarcely differed throughout the entire period of production (apart from those notified by the mint), and it is the source of the copper and possibly where it was smelted that creates the different colour - i.e. the level and chemical composition of impurities and the proportion of these removed during smelting. It's all a bit complicated but I might post a thread about it one day. King's Norton clearly used a very consistent source of supply, possibly with some ferrous contamination in the copper.

    "Not a lot of people know this" ... but, have you noticed there are sometimes ordinary pennies from 1912 to 1919 with the same reddish/brown colour as the KN pennies? Apparently, Kings Norton supplied blanks to the Mint throughout that period. So I treasure my 1912KN penny !


  20. It looks like this coin, but the coin i have looks silver not gold

    http://www.ringramcoins.com/HG1778.htm

    http://www.aww-kittah-aww.com/up/public/86752/DSCF0221.JPG

    It looks like WHAT? Actually, the picture you supplied looks like nothing so much as a dustbin lid visited by several cats and a huge drunk man during the night... :lol: (Oh wait, the reverse is a lot clearer)

    The Richard Ingrams coin shows a George III guinea, so yours is either a silver copy or a token or a model. It would need very careful cleaning by someone with expertise in restoring coins - have you thought about consulting your local museum?


  21. The 5 is clearly too high in relation to the 0. This is a 'tooled' coin and because of the damage is really only worth £2-£3 scrap value. The seller has been reported to eBay.

    That's a shame. The seller may have been in complete ignorance about this. It's the coin that should have been reported. :(


  22. Snap! The period I was rifling through all the pennies in my father's shop was exactly that, 68-70 (71 actually). I found a few 02 LTs, 18Hs, 19Hs and amazingly a 1918 Royal Mint with 35% lustre (but never a KN or a 53). One other Saturday boy used to collect as well and we used to scrap over the 'rarities'. Of the 'straight' dates (if you ignore anything genuinely rare, or before 1895) 26 and 32 were always the scarcest, we really didn't bother with anything else. In the cold light of day, neither are genuinely rare, just scarcer than the others. Changing tack slightly, I think what makes Hs and KNs so unusual in the high grades is that most people that collected new - that have ever collected new, right back to the Greeks - are just like we were, 12 year old kids and nobody told them about the little marks to the left of the date. Hence, one new penny per year would, unless they were very lucky have been the bog standard Royal Mint issue.

    Ah, happy days...

    Happy days indeed! I did wait ages before my first 1926 penny, and then it was another year into collecting before I discovered (a moment of dawning bliss) that it was a Modified Effigy.

    I have another theory about the H and KN pennies. I have a 1919H penny that has virtually no wear on it, but virtually no hair either! I think that the two assistant mints used their dies for longer than the Royal Mint did, and the portrait - being so deeply cut that it caused the infamous reverse 'ghosting' - took the brunt of the strike and wore fastest. So the H and KN pennies often got struck up on worn dies leaving fewer specimens well struck up (or maybe even, the Royal Mint passed already wearing obverse dies to Heaton and Kings Norton to save money). Another factor may also be the different alloy used by the two mints : you'll have noticed I'm sure, that H pennies are usually darker and blacker in colour than usual, while the KN pennies are virtually always a reddish/brown colour. Maybe if the alloys were slightly harder, it wore the dies out faster.


  23. These were not common coins at all, and you could wait for months to get one in your change; looks as if the market is beginning to notice. In the meantime I am pleased with my investment (cf. stocks and shares anyone?).

    I don't know what period you're talking about Red? I can tell you that from 1968 to 1970, when I used to take my pocket money into the banks and get bags of pennies to look through - these were by no means scarce in my experience. I used to save them, plus 1926, and 1922, plus genuine rarities if I was lucky enough to find them (a fair few 19H, a tub of 12H, one 18KN, one 1953 - interestingly no 02LT or 18H, and though every dealer was selling 50 and 51 they NEVER turned up in change!) . It's just embarrassing how many of them all I ended up with, all filed away for future "investment" (hah!). I'm betting so many other schoolkids and collectors were doing the same, they are now no scarcer in lower grades than some of the commoner dates.

    And as for BU, well all I can say is, I've seen a few, but rarely a BU 1930 (in fact, I'm not sure I ever have).

    Bottom line, 8 million does not a scarce penny make! To me, and this is my own personal opinion only, the 1932 penny 'mystique' is just a joke. If I were nominating rare BU pennies I would say 1915 and 1916, 1926, 1930.

×