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.

1949threepence

Had a field day on e bay......

Recommended Posts

Just now, 1949threepence said:

That would be consistent with Gouby's explanation.

Do Golbourn coins have a website? I did do a search, but couldn't find them. Maybe the name spelling is adrift?  

No he doesnt have a website Mike he just does a list every couple of months.I sent you his telephone number in a PM a couple of weeks ago.

Looking at Daves last list he has / had a 1945 with 40% lustre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

No he doesnt have a website Mike he just does a list every couple of months.I sent you his telephone number in a PM a couple of weeks ago.

Looking at Daves last list he has / had a 1945 with 40% lustre.

You mentioned his name on a PM you sent on 19th April, Pete. But there was no telephone number. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

You mentioned his name on a PM you sent on 19th April, Pete. But there was no telephone number. 

 

Sorry and i had spelt it wrong 🙂 its Goulborn..Will PM his number now anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2019 at 10:42 PM, Peckris 2 said:

The 1937 are probably the least exciting (to me) penny varieties - none of them is rare and they are micro varieties at best. The two 1940s are a different matter; the 'common' one is fairly elusive in BU but the other one (rated N in Freeman) is a bugger to get. I was lucky enough to get mine from John Dunkerton of Windsor Coins in the late 70s when collectors weren't too bothered about them.

The 1944 is - as you've found - surprisingly hard in genuine Unc; mine is AUnc only but I've never been either enthused to upgrade or seen one at the right price.

I cannot find a high grade 1946 O N E ' for love nor money. Should you find two in your search, let me know!!

 

On 4/12/2019 at 10:57 PM, 1949threepence said:

At least it's very easy to spot, Chris. I'm looking for a 1940 with a single exergual line.

If I spot a couple of decent 1946 O N E ', types I'll let you know !

Well I've managed to locate and buy one in "mid" grade. £19.95 and issue free. The scarcity is probably akin to the 1879 narrow date penny. Not that difficult in VF and below, but incredibly tough in EF and above.

 

comma 1946 rev.jpg

comma 1946 obv.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5 May 2019 at 9:19 PM, 1949threepence said:

I'm wondering if this is one:-  

 

non mint darkened 1944 rev.jpg

Non mint darkened 1944 obv.jpg

Hmmm. That's so worn compared to surviving lustre, that I'd be tempted to say it has been artificially lustred at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2019 at 4:08 PM, Peckris 2 said:

Hmmm. That's so worn compared to surviving lustre, that I'd be tempted to say it has been artificially lustred at some point.

Don't know, you could be right. But it was so dirt cheap I decided to buy it anyway. I note it is the wide date variety referred to earlier by @terrysoldpennies with the last 4 over a tooth. The only other 1944 I can find with a (supposed) bright finish was in the Crocker collection, and that too has the final 4 over a tooth. Same as Terry's on the previous page.

In hand I'm no further forward than with the pic above. Through the loupe it looks almost UNC in some parts, and more worn in others. Anomaly.

Pleased to say though I have managed to get 1945 and 1946 bright finishes relatively easily. Didn't take that much of a search. The 1945 one has got a few dark stains on the reverse (don't look like carbon spots). Maybe this is a tiny bit of hypo which splashed on to this coin, but otherwise didn't get the full treatment.  

 

 

bright finish 1945 rev.jpg

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to interupt the thread but IMO these are a lot scarcer than maybe Mike thinks and if he has just started looking ,he must of got lucky .🙂

I have looked at plenty in hand and thrown most away after buying from a photograph as a lot have been cleaned and if anyone is looking for them to edge on the side of caution..

The Hypo will come off as it would in circulation ,so probably best to look for ones that are UNC.with no signs of wear.

Also ones that maybe look MT but should not be such as 1940 ,1947 have often been polished and will be glowing unnaturally a purple colour when tilted as the polish or solvent has been rubbed into the metal.

Maybe nobody else wants them but if you are looking the genuine ones are scarce as they are errors in production.

Only my opinion but if you do want one maybe have a second look at the picture (or buy from a dealer ) rather than like me throwing them in the bin when they arrive :D

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Don't know, you could be right. But it was so dirt cheap I decided to buy it anyway. I note it is the wide date variety referred to earlier by @terrysoldpennies with the last 4 over a tooth. The only other 1944 I can find with a (supposed) bright finish was in the Crocker collection, and that too has the final 4 over a tooth. Same as Terry's on the previous page.

In hand I'm no further forward than with the pic above. Through the loupe it looks almost UNC in some parts, and more worn in others. Anomaly.

Pleased to say though I have managed to get 1945 and 1946 bright finishes relatively easily. Didn't take that much of a search. The 1945 one has got a few dark stains on the reverse (don't look like carbon spots). Maybe this is a tiny bit of hypo which splashed on to this coin, but otherwise didn't get the full treatment.  

 

 

bright finish 1945 rev.jpg

The mark on the arm looks to be the tab of a staple, perhaps not in direct contact with the coin, through paper maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

Sorry to interupt the thread but IMO these are a lot scarcer than maybe Mike thinks and if he has just started looking ,he must of got lucky .🙂

I have looked at plenty in hand and thrown most away after buying from a photograph as a lot have been cleaned and if anyone is looking for them to edge on the side of caution..

The Hypo will come off as it would in circulation ,so probably best to look for ones that are UNC.with no signs of wear.

Also ones that maybe look MT but should not be such as 1940 ,1947 have often been polished and will be glowing unnaturally a purple colour when tilted as the polish or solvent has been rubbed into the metal.

Maybe nobody else wants them but if you are looking the genuine ones are scarce as they are errors in production.

Only my opinion but if you do want one maybe have a second look at the picture (or buy from a dealer ) rather than like me throwing them in the bin when they arrive :D

 

 

 

But you advised me by PM about that guy who had 1944, 1945 and 1946, all UNC non MT, on offer for £15.00 each. So they can't be that scarce, surely.  

I've got a duplicate MT in UNC, so I'll do a before pic, then try cleaning it. If it works, I'll post the result on here.  

56 minutes ago, Diaconis said:

The mark on the arm looks to be the tab of a staple, perhaps not in direct contact with the coin, through paper maybe.

Possibly, although looks a bit narrow for a staple. Maybe a different type to the office staples I'm thinking of.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones i mentioned i did also say i hadnt seen and was just trying to help you if you wanted them , as far as the price i think that is more due to the fact that not many probably want them.

I dont mean scarce as in only a few known ,just more you did well to find all three in a week.

The post was for anyone else who may be looking ,your coins you have in hand so must be ok.

An UNC coin will probably have been less likely to have been cleaned and IMO the large pictured one has been ,possibly starting to retone as a normal coin would.

 

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-George-VI-1d-One-Penny-Coin-Good-Grade-/303022267179?hash=item468d88db2b%3Ag%3ANVgAAOSwohVcM6hV&nma=true&si=RoK94v15yq838hgYv7cnTr69aSs%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

This is another having a look at completed listings that IMO is also cleaned and partly worn off ,although shows the base metal and a couple of others are to worn to be convincing.

1946 is the hardest one to find and dont have a clue if there is any reason why 🙂

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-George-VI-1d-One-Penny-Coin-Good-Grade-/303022267179?hash=item468d88db2b%3Ag%3ANVgAAOSwohVcM6hV&nma=true&si=RoK94v15yq838hgYv7cnTr69aSs%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

This is another having a look at completed listings that IMO is also cleaned ,although shows the base metal and a couple of others are to worn to be convincing.

1946 is the hardest one to find and dont have a clue if there is any reason why 🙂

Why should so many of them have been cleaned? The odd one yes, but I can't see why cleaning would have been as widespread on these modern circulation coins, as you are implying.

Anyway, as I said, I will clean this MT 1946 and show it once done. I'll be interested in the results.

(starting by immersing in warm soapy water)

 

 

mint toned 1946 rev.jpg

mint toned 1946 obv.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just some cleaned and worn ,i dont mean all of them :D and just much easier to tell a good one from a photograph if its UNC.

The ODD one that has been cleaned or the worn ones are more likely to look like a Not MT one in a picture.Otherwise they would just be normal which the majority are and have not been cleaned.

If it looks bright which few do.........Is it natural with no HYpo or cleaned /worn 😊

More that its better to check the pictures and try to find them in UNC to be sure.

If you have a pile of them they will all be different colours but a true NOT mt one should just look like a 1947 otherwise its still MT and just lighter.

Made me smile........Warm soapy water 🙂 ,that wont do anything give it a scrub and clean it with something like petrol to get the hypo off.

You need to put some elbow into it  😂 joking aside you know what a cleaned coin looks like and dont need to mess about with one.

Again i think the large picture is a good example.

If it nlooks bright.it may be cleaned 🙂

 

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

Just some cleaned and worn ,i dont mean all of them :D and just much easier to tell a good one from a photograph if its UNC.

The odd one that has been cleaned or the worn ones are more likely to look like a Not MT one in a picture.

More that its better to check the pictures and try to find them in UNC to be sure.

If you have a pile of them they will all be different colours but a true NOT mt one should just look like a 1947 otherwise its still MT and just lighter.

Made me smile........Warm soapy water 🙂 ,that wont do anything give it a scrub and clean it with something like petrol to get the hypo off.

You need to put some elbow into it  😂 joking aside you know what a cleaned coin looks like

Again i think the large picture is a good example.

If it nlooks bright.it may be cleaned 🙂

 

Hmmm, be really fascinating to know how many MT pennies have been singled out for the petrol treatment lol :blink:;)

Nah, not going that far, but I will use something on it. Like I said, immersing in warm soapy water, was a start. 

My view is that if it looks non MT it probably is (the large picture above, excepted), or that some nearly are depending on the extent of the hypo dousing they got, or avoided. I don't buy for one second that a substantial number have been cleaned. As you said yourself, they're hardly prime objects of numismatic interest   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Why should so many of them have been cleaned? The odd one yes, but I can't see why cleaning would have been as widespread on these modern circulation coins, as you are implying.

Anyway, as I said, I will clean this MT 1946 and show it once done. I'll be interested in the results.

(starting by immersing in warm soapy water)

 

 

mint toned 1946 rev.jpg

mint toned 1946 obv.jpg

Here is the same coin after treatment with a brillo pad and some Mr Muscle. There is no mistaking it for a non MT. It looks properly cleaned.

 

cleaned 1946 rev.jpg

cleaned 1946 obv.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Hmmm, be really fascinating to know how many MT pennies have been singled out for the petrol treatment lol :blink:;)

Nah, not going that far, but I will use something on it. Like I said, immersing in warm soapy water, was a start. 

My view is that if it looks non MT it probably is (the large picture above, excepted), or that some nearly are depending on the extent of the hypo dousing they got, or avoided. I don't buy for one second that a substantial number have been cleaned. As you said yourself, they're hardly prime objects of numismatic interest   

No Mike i probably havent explained very wel.

If anyone looks at a hundred pictures of 1944 pennies only a few will look like they have no mint toning.Should you buy the few one may be ok ,one  maybe cleaned and one just worn. 

So maybe only one  has been cleaned out of the hundred .

Petrol was just an example it could be a brilo pad :D or anything else that has took the surface dye off.

Anyway as i said glad you got them and you did really well to find them ,sometimes we can only find out by having the coin in hand.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Here is the same coin after treatment with a brillo pad and some Mr Muscle. There is no mistaking it for a non MT. It looks properly cleaned.

 

cleaned 1946 rev.jpg

cleaned 1946 obv.jpg

You got the spots off though :D

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

No Mike i probably havent explained very wel.

If anyone looks at a hundred pictures of 1944 pennies only a few will look like they have no mint toning.Should you buy the few one may be ok ,one  maybe cleaned and one just worn. 

So maybe only one  has been cleaned out of the hundred .

Petrol was just an example it could be a brilo pad :D or anything else that has took the surface dye off.

Anyway as i said glad you got them and you did really well to find them ,sometimes we can only find out by having the coin in hand.

Be honest Pete. It's all guesswork on your part isn't it? I don't think even one in 100 have been cleaned. Why should they have been?

It would mean that they would have been taken when virtually just minted, cleaned, and then held in the same state until put up for sale recently. But not looking cleaned and with the original lustre still intact. 

A cleaned coin, previously hypo'd is as shown above. The ones I've got are not cleaned, although they may have a lot less hypo on than a fully MT one, and not be truly non MT. Again, guesswork on all our parts.

Although of the three, I do think 1944 is the hardest to find in non MT unc, just as it is in MT. 

 

Share this post


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

Be honest Pete. It's all guesswork on your part isn't it? I don't think even one in 100 have been cleaned. Why should they have been?

It would mean that they would have been taken when virtually just minted, cleaned, and then held in the same state until put up for sale recently. But not looking cleaned and with the original lustre still intact. 

A cleaned coin, previously hypo'd is as shown above. The ones I've got are not cleaned, although they may have a lot less hypo on than a fully MT one, and not be truly non MT. Again, guesswork on all our parts.

Although of the three, I do think 1944 is the hardest to find in non MT unc, just as it is in MT. 

 

Yes it may well be guess work (being honest ) as can only go off the ones i have bought from pictures and had in hand

Some of the ones that have been messed with / cleaned leave some of the lustre that may look like it has not been fully toned. at the mint..

We are not talking about the removal of all of the toning.

Only by having them in hand can you be really sure and i have looked at pictures for the last couple of years.

I would think (guess ) probably 1 in 100 of most denomination have been messed about with and cleaned on ebay and in this instance we are looking for ones that are the base metal colour that the  MT ones are not.

Coins are cleaned Not in this case to remove the MT but to get rid of anything on it so in the sellers opinion it makes it look better. The result being in some instances part of the mint toning has been removed as well.This then has the appearance in a picture of the toning not being complete and having some lustre.I do feel i am able to tell if a coin has been cleaned but am the first to admit i may sometimes be wrong.

Looking at the one Terry bought ,i would have doubts (guessing again ) looking at that picture also ,but again in hand Terry says its ok.

The large picture is another ,so that is a couple looking at photographs just on this thread i would be....... guessing  😊 if i did not have the benefit of both you and Terry having them.

I did not mention your own coin was cleaned and just that some others may not be right looking at a  picture..

Maybe the ones i have kept  were much better and are not partial toning but full 100% NOT MT just like a 1947.

A fully NOT MT coin there should be know doubt at all ,its the ones that are partial were the problem is in telling the difference from a picture.

I have had a few good ones but have had a few that were rubbish , so although i may be guessingi have learned not to be sure from a picture and i cant be more honest than that..

Pete.

 

 

 

 

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see how you can successfully strip down a fully MT coin so that just the hypo is washed away and what looks like a MT coin with lustre emerges. The 1945 and 1946 non MT I have, show the normal base metal lustre gleaming in the usual fashion as you turn them in the light. I don't think they've been messed with at all.  

If you can demonstrate how it would be done, then I'll take my metaphorical hat off, stand and applaud. But I don't think you can - and don't forget you were the one who scoffed at warm soapy water, and suggested petrol.  

Generally speaking, you can recognise a cleaned coin a mile off.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

I just don't see how you can successfully strip down a fully MT coin so that just the hypo is washed away and what looks like a MT coin with lustre emerges. The 1945 and 1946 non MT I have, show the normal base metal lustre gleaming in the usual fashion as you turn them in the light. I don't think they've been messed with at all.  

If you can demonstrate how it would be done, then I'll take my metaphorical hat off, stand and applaud. But I don't think you can - and don't forget you were the one who scoffed at warm soapy water, and suggested petrol.  

Generally speaking, you can recognise a cleaned coin a mile off.      

 

The Large picture ,you were not sure about and from the picture neither was i but thought it looked cleaned , i am often wrong and its how i learn.

The ones you have in hand you have the benefit of being able to see properley and more so than in a photo.

I am being honest about throwing some away and wish i had kept them now as would of sent them you 😊

As i mentioned earlier i was just giving my opinion for maybe others to double check the picture.

I cant say anymore without repeating myself ,so will let you have your own opinion on them.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend.

Pete.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos certainly can be very deceptive, and I was concerned as to whether it had been cleaned or not, but in this case it was fine and the appearance is identical to the other bright finish coins of the other years around it in the collection, though there is some very slight toning . I my experience cleaning coins never brings the whole serface of the coin back to a brand new mint finish , as they frequently look patchy ,and also often leaves the edge around the legend and teeth looking slightly darker in tone. Natural toning may also be responsible for the loss of some light finish coins , as distinguishing the difference between them and Hypo coated coins is made more difficult.  :D

Share this post


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

Be honest Pete. It's all guesswork on your part isn't it? I don't think even one in 100 have been cleaned. Why should they have been?

It would mean that they would have been taken when virtually just minted, cleaned, and then held in the same state until put up for sale recently. But not looking cleaned and with the original lustre still intact. 

A cleaned coin, previously hypo'd is as shown above. The ones I've got are not cleaned, although they may have a lot less hypo on than a fully MT one, and not be truly non MT. Again, guesswork on all our parts.

Although of the three, I do think 1944 is the hardest to find in non MT unc, just as it is in MT. 

 

Thought i would check the 1946 to see if i had been missing something as logic does say that 1944 would be scarcer of the three to find.

The private message i sent you was wrong looking at the list ,only two were described as NOT MT 1944 & 1945......NO 1946 .

Dave Craddock has not had a 1946 on a list for two years but had the others ,i dont have the lists going back any further.

There wasnt one in the Crocker sale and cgs have only graded one although more for other years. .

Not much else to go off ,but as i said to find one in a couple of days you did really well.I have been looking for a lot longer and only ever found one one for sale ,which is the cgs one.

Also with regards looking at pictures.

Terry says he wasnt sure and was it cleaned untill it arrived 🙂

Groom says in his book "Care in identifying light specimens is needed once they become worn " ...rubbing  is sometimes from a picture similar to wear and the reason i said its better to look for an UNC one.

Also its not only pictures and even in hand that people edge on the side of caution.

The Crocker sale............Possibly a bright finish ?

The workman sale.........Appears to be a bright finish.

Neither of these two give me a lot of confidence and looking at the pictures i again cant be sure. .

You say       "Its all guess work on your part isnt it "     i probably can have a quite an  educated guess after looking for a couple of years ,two of which i  have sold  1944 & 1945 on the forum about eighteen months ago.The picture i put up was with another to compare as i knew its hard to tell from a picture even back then.

I stand by what i say ,hard to tell from a photo ,some that look NOT MT have been cleaned and 1946 is the hardest to find.

i will always admit to being wrong as i am often ,although i feel on this occasion i might actually be right for a change.

Have a good day and why your finding them STAY lucky 😊

Pete.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only wish i had kept the cleaned ones now :D

However i bought a 1948 off an ebay picture that myself and another forum member were undecided about ,as to weather it was MT ,i cant find the ebay picture anymore but still have the cleaned coin and am happy to post FOC to anyone who may be interested.

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 5:42 PM, 1949threepence said:

Hmmm, be really fascinating to know how many MT pennies have been singled out for the petrol treatment lol :blink:;)

Nah, not going that far, but I will use something on it. Like I said, immersing in warm soapy water, was a start. 

My view is that if it looks non MT it probably is (the large picture above, excepted), or that some nearly are depending on the extent of the hypo dousing they got, or avoided. I don't buy for one second that a substantial number have been cleaned. As you said yourself, they're hardly prime objects of numismatic interest   

I thought it better to use another fact as you may be interested to know.

The graders at cgs have been looking for years ,well before cgs started and have obviously looked at the coins in hand.

Although you may not agree with there opinion it is know doubt better than mine.

On there data base they have six 1944 pennies submitted as NOT MT and only one 1946.

The part you may find fascinating is that out of six submitted two of them were rejected.

I will let you guess why.

Pete.

Edited by PWA 1967

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

×