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.

Sign in to follow this  
craigy

Pennies

Recommended Posts

what would this grade as in peoples opinions ?   is it natural colour or cleaned, hopefully you can work out what are scratches on the case and not the coin 

P1020647.jpg

P1020649.jpg

Edited by craigy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say it is Almost UNC nice coin:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, UPINSMOKE said:

I would say it is Almost UNC nice coin:)

CGS would grade it 65 no doubt :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say a/UNC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about this one ?    the black lines on the obverse are not on the coin, 

P1020653.JPG

P1020655.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EF for me, maybe GEF at a stretch. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1949threepence said:

EF for me, maybe GEF at a stretch. .

 can i ask on what basis, not because i think your wrong but to help me understand grading, is it the lack of lustre ? i understand these were darkened at the mint ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, craigy said:

 can i ask on what basis, not because i think your wrong but to help me understand grading, is it the lack of lustre ? i understand these were darkened at the mint ? 

It's not so much the lack of lustre, it's actually to do with the wear. For a coin to be classed as UNC there has to be no detectable wear. In this case, there is light but obvious wear on Britannia's right leg, as well as in the topmost points of the KIng's hair. It's not much, but it is enough to take the coin down from UNC status, in my opinion. 

Compare it with your 1927, which is UNC, and you'll see the differences. 

       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

It's not so much the lack of lustre, it's actually to do with the wear. For a coin to be classed as UNC there has to be no detectable wear. In this case, there is light but obvious wear on Britannia's right leg, as well as in the topmost points of the KIng's hair. It's not much, but it is enough to take the coin down from UNC status, in my opinion. 

Compare it with your 1927, which is UNC, and you'll see the differences. 

       

so there is such a fine line between the grades,   the busts on george V aren't that great at the best of times,    i can see the slight differences, just knowing what the starting point is

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you haven't got it, buy "The Standard Guide To Grading British Coins" (from Predecimal). It nicely describes and illustrates the grades (states of wear) on all the major obverses and reverses. Every design has its high point of relief which shows wear first, and on George V obverses it's around the eye and top of ear which wears first, reducing it to EF as in your 1934 penny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×