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  
Russ777

Silver sixpences of George VI

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!)

When I say half maybe an over guesstimation but certainly a great deal thinner will up load pics in a couple minutes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 1942 is noticeably thinner and different tone to it than 1941.

My question is were other metals used in the war period the 1941 one is almost double in thickness yet weighs the same.. as the 1942

Thoughts please. Could I have a 1942 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!)

When I say half maybe an over guesstimation but certainly a great deal thinner will up load pics in a couple minutes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I concur and was getting ready to say that much depends on the original strike as well as some specimes are struck with the rim "finning" and may appear a bit thicker but that is rather a corollary to what has just been posted.

Also, neither date would be a target for a counterfeiter as they are not rare and would not be much profit in faking such a small denomination even in the 1940s.

I was beginning to get excited right as you first were describing these coins as I was hoping you had found one of the pattern 1946 6ds in cupro-nickel, and that would have been a special rarity....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fully agreeing with the points made by Peckris & Vicky Silver, I would also point out that such differences in thickness also occur in other denominations. For example, if you take a number of 1992 10p pieces, and look at their respective widths, you will almost certainly see some manifestly thinner than others.

Width disparity doesn't necessarily imply a fake coin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I concur and was getting ready to say that much depends on the original strike as well as some specimes are struck with the rim "finning" and may appear a bit thicker but that is rather a corollary to what has just been posted.

Also, neither date would be a target for a counterfeiter as they are not rare and would not be much profit in faking such a small denomination even in the 1940s.

I was beginning to get excited right as you first were describing these coins as I was hoping you had found one of the pattern 1946 6ds in cupro-nickel, and that would have been a special rarity....

I didn't know there were any :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, rare is rare. Evidently these were made for 6d, 1/- (English, not sure about Scotish), 2/-, 2/6. Some years ago I got the shilling in an European auction but not seen the others - they are in ESC which I do not have with me as I am away from home for a week or so more.

ESC quoted R6 for the shilling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've handled alot of lower grade 'scrap' silver over the years and there is a wide variation in coin thickness, all due to wear. In fact it can be so noticable that if you were to pile 10 average 6ds in one pile and 10 worn 6ds in another, the pile with the worn coins would be one coin less in height (particularly noticable with pre-1920 silver).

Same goes for current 1p coins (although not as noticable because bronze is a harder metal) a pile of ten 1971s can often appear a bit smaller than a pile of 1991 coins (isn't always the case, depends hw much active circulation they've had and how many have spend several years snuggled up in a piggy bank).

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  

×