William Wyon penny

[unc 0]

Hi all,

I am new here but would be extremely grateful if anyone can tell me a bit more about the lettering on my 1854 penny. I can't tell whether or not I have the 1854/3 overdate variety (despite its' alleged mint condition) or just a poor strike. Also, looking at 'dei' it seems to me as though there is either overstamping onto larger serifs (underneath) or some die deterioration double-stamping. Either way, I find it interesting and would like to know a bit more about it if possible. Can anyone help? Thanks, Alex.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attach a picture because my files are too big. Can anyone advise me on how the files can be put up here? I did try to compress but no luck.

[Chingford 166]

Hi all,

I am new here but would be extremely grateful if anyone can tell me a bit more about the lettering on my 1854 penny. I can't tell whether or not I have the 1854/3 overdate variety (despite its' alleged mint condition) or just a poor strike. Also, looking at 'dei' it seems to me as though there is either overstamping onto larger serifs (underneath) or some die deterioration double-stamping. Either way, I find it interesting and would like to know a bit more about it if possible. Can anyone help? Thanks, Alex.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attach a picture because my files are too big. Can anyone advise me on how the files can be put up here? I did try to compress but no luck.

You need to reduce the images to 150kb to post direct, 'click to attach files' below, select images and then select 'Add to post', you will have to post each seperately if they are more than the 150kb max. for each post. alternatively a link to photobucket or the like cane be embedded into the post.

The Copper series is littered with overdates, double strikings and recut dies, the 54/3 is a distinctive type, once you have seen one there is no mistaking it.

John

Edited December 4, 2011 by Chingford

[unc 0]

Hi all,

I am new here but would be extremely grateful if anyone can tell me a bit more about the lettering on my 1854 penny. I can't tell whether or not I have the 1854/3 overdate variety (despite its' alleged mint condition) or just a poor strike. Also, looking at 'dei' it seems to me as though there is either overstamping onto larger serifs (underneath) or some die deterioration double-stamping. Either way, I find it interesting and would like to know a bit more about it if possible. Can anyone help? Thanks, Alex.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attach a picture because my files are too big. Can anyone advise me on how the files can be put up here? I did try to compress but no luck.

You need to reduce the images to 150kb to post direct, 'click to attach files' below, select images and then select 'Add to post', you will have to post each seperately if they are more than the 150kb max. for each post. alternatively a link to photobucket or the like cane be embedded into the post.

The Copper series is littered with overdates, double strikings and recut dies, the 54/3 is a distinctive type, once you have seen one there is no mistaking it.

John

Thanks John, i'll have another stab at the pictures now.

Alex.

[Chingford 166]

Edited December 10, 2011 by Chingford

[Coinery 926]

Re the hair detail on the 4 over 3, it never occurred to me before that this would be the case. Is this because they only used worn 3's to overdate, or is it because the dies used were worn, thus the hair detail a consistent weakness throughout that particular mintage?

[Peter 615]

Re the hair detail on the 4 over 3, it never occurred to me before that this would be the case. Is this because they only used worn 3's to overdate, or is it because the dies used were worn, thus the hair detail a consistent weakness throughout that particular mintage?

You would think common sense would prevail in only bothering to recut a reletivley unworn die.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Re the hair detail on the 4 over 3, it never occurred to me before that this would be the case. Is this because they only used worn 3's to overdate, or is it because the dies used were worn, thus the hair detail a consistent weakness throughout that particular mintage?

You would think common sense would prevail in only bothering to recut a reletivley unworn die.

Frugal Victorians Peter. You also have to remember that they were striking for currency users not us poor coin collectors.

[Red Riley 2]

You would think common sense would prevail in only bothering to recut a reletivley unworn die.

Frugal Victorians Peter. You also have to remember that they were striking for currency users not us poor coin collectors.

Basically, if it hadn't flown to bits it was still serviceable. How many Victorian (and earlier) coins have you seen with great die cracks running across them. Its days were numbered but if it could still produce a few more coins then they just kept banging away. Nowadays labour represents a high percentage of a manufacturers cost but then it was cheap, so better to pay someone a pittance to recut a die rather than throw it away and start on a new one.

[Chingford 166]

Re the hair detail on the 4 over 3, it never occurred to me before that this would be the case. Is this because they only used worn 3's to overdate, or is it because the dies used were worn, thus the hair detail a consistent weakness throughout that particular mintage?

I have attached some obv images

[Chingford 166]

Re the hair detail on the 4 over 3, it never occurred to me before that this would be the case. Is this because they only used worn 3's to overdate, or is it because the dies used were worn, thus the hair detail a consistent weakness throughout that particular mintage?

I have attached some obv images

Final image, as Red has said the die has started to crack (R in VICTORIA), becoming unservicable, so probably not many struck after this example

[1949threepence 3,366]

You would think common sense would prevail in only bothering to recut a reletivley unworn die.

Frugal Victorians Peter. You also have to remember that they were striking for currency users not us poor coin collectors.

Basically, if it hadn't flown to bits it was still serviceable. How many Victorian (and earlier) coins have you seen with great die cracks running across them. Its days were numbered but if it could still produce a few more coins then they just kept banging away. Nowadays labour represents a high percentage of a manufacturers cost but then it was cheap, so better to pay someone a pittance to recut a die rather than throw it away and start on a new one.

There seem to be many more die cracks prior to the mid 1870's ~ or is that my imagination ? (certainly as far as pennies are concerned)

[unc 0]

Thanks for the input all.

Alex.