1987 5 pence observations

[zookeeperz 470]

Good evening. I noticed no variety types for the 1987 new 5 pence and whilst this may or may not be a trivial detail I thought I would put it out there and see if anyone has similar coins. Sorry for  the appalling pics but thats microscopes that cost £200 for you. Absolute dross lol. Firstly if you can notice one is how we expect bright shiney with that mirror like reflection . The other is matt with a background lustre but not a normal in your face lustre that you instantly see. On this coin it is only evident when you spin it in the light. It is almost like it has been blasted with sand to give a zinc like look but not as dark. What causes that? metal mix? Secondly it might be just my tired old eyes but the first coin seems to be a higher relief and a lot more bold on the detail like the hair. Nose looks slightly different and more noticeable is the shape of the end of the bust truncation . Coin A is a thicker edge whilst coin B it tapers to a point. Thoughts gents? 

[jelida 1,197]

Could one be the first coin struck with that pair of dies, and the other the 50,000th when the dies are worn and dulled?

Jerry

[zookeeperz 470]

11 hours ago, jelida said:

Could one be the first coin struck with that pair of dies, and the other the 50,000th when the dies are worn and dulled?

Jerry

Maybe but it seems to occur quite randomly . It is like when I go through an assorted bag of coins you can tel the year on some simply by the finish on the coins . Maybe a small metal impurity causes some of it? What about the bust though that is a design difference not a strike erosion ? One curves down straight the other curves out and to a tapered point

Edited November 2, 2017 by zookeeperz

[jelida 1,197]

The RM keep the alloy within very close tolerances, erroneous variations are unlikely, but of course they don’t necessarily announce deliberate changes, though these would probably be somewhere in the annual report.

As regards the angle at the front of the bust, while it could be a deliberate change, in which case I would expect others, it could as I suggested earlier be a slight rounding (splaying of the edges on the die) of that angle due to wear, or due to die fill of the tip. You would probably have to get some yea or nay from the RM to know.

Best view metal as a very solid liquid, not everything stays in its place if subject to extreme forces.

Jerry

 

[Peckris 579]

On 2 November 2017 at 11:51 AM, zookeeperz said:

Maybe but it seems to occur quite randomly . It is like when I go through an assorted bag of coins you can tel the year on some simply by the finish on the coins . Maybe a small metal impurity causes some of it? 

It might be worth pointing out that the 'finish' on decimal coins between 1968 and the 80s, is almost worth a discussion paper on its own. For example, the majority of 1968 coins have a 'satin' finish, whereas in 1969 there are quite a few with 'mirror' type finish. As you go through the 70s, the proportion of mirror to satin increases sharply, almost in line with the mirror proofs that suddenly flood the market from the mid-70s. It's actually hard to find any pre-decimal coins with a mirror finish, apart from certain noted exceptions such as the New York 1960 crowns, some 1961 halfcrowns (and there are other dates and other denominations through the 50s and 60s, which are unreported) which are described as 'polished blanks'.

I do not believe this is metal impurity, but a deliberate trial of different finishes by the Royal Mint, perhaps to see how circulation affects each type?

Edited November 20, 2017 by Peckris

[zookeeperz 470]

8 minutes ago, Peckris said:

It might be worth pointing out that the 'finish' on decimal coins between 1968 and the 80s, is almost worth a discussion paper on its own. For example, the majority of 1968 coins have a 'satin' finish, whereas in 1969 there are quite a few with 'mirror' type finish. As you go through the 70s, the proportion of mirror to satin increases sharply, almost in line with the mirror proofs that suddenly flood the market from the mid-70s. It's actually hard to find any pre-decimal coins with a mirror finish, apart from certain noted exceptions such as the New York 1960 crowns, some 1961 halfcrowns (and there are other dates and other denominations through the 50s and 60s, which are unreported) which are described as 'polished blanks'.

I do not believe this is metal impurity, but a deliberate trial of different finishes by the Royal Mint, perhaps to see how circulation affects each type?

I did read somewhere that on a certain coin and for the life of me I cannot remember there were 2 different finishes on the coin because half were struck at the royal mint and half were struck at Illastraint  mint (hope I have the correct spelling) where one exhibited a more matt finish whilst the royal mint coins were shinny and lustered?

[Peckris 579]

1 minute ago, zookeeperz said:

I did read somewhere that on a certain coin and for the life of me I cannot remember there were 2 different finishes on the coin because half were struck at the royal mint and half were struck at Illastraint  mint (hope I have the correct spelling) where one exhibited a more matt finish whilst the royal mint coins were shinny and lustered?

I'd like to know which coin that was? My understanding (which may be wrong ... I was once ) is that the London Mint finished off the pre-decimal issues, then turned their attention to proofs and commemoratives, whereas the Llantrisant Mint did all the decimal issues, of which there was a vast number. I'm not sure when the London Mint finished business, but it may have been the mid-70s? Not sure.

[zookeeperz 470]

It is definitely one of the 5 pence Coins I am thinking 1987 . I had so many 5 pence coins I could almost tell the year from the finish on the matt looking ones . It happens on 1987  for sure and it isn't as if it were the odd coin it is pretty much split but I would say more matt than lustered. I will look again and see where I read it . 

[Peckris 579]

5 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

It is definitely one of the 5 pence Coins I am thinking 1987 . I had so many 5 pence coins I could almost tell the year from the finish on the matt looking ones . It happens on 1987  for sure and it isn't as if it were the odd coin it is pretty much split but I would say more matt than lustered. I will look again and see where I read it . 

The London Mint (I'm sure) closed down long before 1987.

[zookeeperz 470]

5 minutes ago, Peckris said:

The London Mint (I'm sure) closed down long before 1987.

I could be mixing my coins . but the coins appearance also  happens in other years. I will take some shots later . Very hard to show you what I see as the scope never really shows the contrast in finishes. In the hand it is obvious one has normal cartwheel luster bright and flashy. The other has the cartwheel effect but it looks like it is trying to luster through a very fine layer of sand if you get my drift . lol Sorry probably a bad explanation but that is what it looks like. There is a cartwheel effect and there is luster but it is iff it is almost hidden.