More Pennies

[secret santa 2,013]

This is interesting - it appears to be reverse r (Freeman N), i.e. F115 not F111,  but with 2 over 1 which has not been recorded ! I can't see the obverse to determine its variety.

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Only glanced and just assumed......... with the overdate it was F111.

Well spotted Richard 

[Nordle11 564]

The overdates are on both F111 and F114 don't forget.

Richard, if it's an N reverse and Heaton mint, then it'll be obverse 12. Difficult without pictures haha.

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Were has Prax gone.

What is it ,bugging me now 

[secret santa 2,013]

This is definitely reverse r with around 50 more teeth than reverse p on both F111 and F114 so if it's a genuine overdate it's really exciting. As you say, it's probably obverse R but it's vital that we know - it could be an unrecorded mule with an overdate !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nordle11 564]

dun Dun DUNNNNN!!!

 

Hmmmm

[secret santa 2,013]

Matt - reverse r (N) also has the "colouring" on the shield but the shield is FLAT - this IS reverse r - believe me.

[Nordle11 564]

Sorry I tried to edit it, I was confusing myself and looking at GOUBY reverse N, instead of Freeman reverse N. Doh!  

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Easy done Matt i am always doing that 

[jelida 1,196]

Well done Prax, I see the coin sat long enough on Ebay USA to be re-listed, and none of us spotted it!  

Well spotted Richard, you are right . Exciting!

Jerry

[secret santa 2,013]

Matt - Absolutely - I always have to go back to the books to be sure.

Edited March 1, 2016 by secret santa
clarity

[secret santa 2,013]

I suspect that the overdate is actually a scratch or a small flaw as it's further left than usual - but you never know...........................

[Prax 80]

 

First off I wouldn’t get too excited about this coin. I got it for £150 and I am pretty certain it’s not anything spectacular. The coin is slabbed NGC 62 BN which makes it difficult to photograph. The interesting thing is that there’s something around the 2, which induced me to take a punt. After inspecting the coin it looks like the line over the 2 might be incuse. In which case it could be a scratch at the right place for me to bonkers about a 2 over 1. The only way to be certain is to unslab it, which I don’t want to do. I don’t suppose this is a new variety or anything and for what we know it is a normal 1882 H but I like the coin

Edited March 1, 2016 by Prax

[secret santa 2,013]

Excitement over - back to the drawing board for Sunday !

[PWA 1967 1,840]

33 minutes ago, secret santa said:

I suspect that the overdate is actually a scratch or a small flaw as it's further left than usual - but you never know...........................

 

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Sorry should of said yes its not right your picture is conclusive richard.

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Happy to fill a gap on the coppers 

Think its hard to get one UNC so this will do.

1831 with WW .

Its the ex-alderley one Lot 41.

[jelida 1,196]

3 hours ago, Prax said:

 

First off I wouldn’t get too excited about this coin. After inspecting the coin it looks like the line over the 2 might be incuse. In which case it could be a scratch at the right place for me to bonkers about a 2 over 1. The only way to be certain is to unslab it, which I don’t want to do. I don’t suppose this is a new variety or anything and for what we know it is a normal 1882 H 

Sadly probably true. ?

Jerry

[alfnail 756]

The recent discussions on the potential new 1882/1 reverse r variety prompted me to take a closer look at my own examples, and this leaves me with a couple of queries. I had previously thought that I had all 3 examples described on pages 78/9 of Michael’s book i.e. Ka, Kb and Ma. I now find, however, that I have two examples of Kb and I am wondering whether I now need to start looking again for a Ka.

I guess the good news is that I have a spare 1882Kb which I can sell to raise pocket money for next weekend…..lol

1882Ma is clearly from a different amended Gouby p reverse to the 1882Kb reverse; the location of the H in relation to the border teeth and two numeral 8’s being particularly noticeable…...so this means there were at least 2 amended reverse dies.

Can I ask, however, if any member has what they believe to be a Ka variety, struck from yet another amended die and with a variation of date numerals (and H) when compared to Kb and Ma?

I have looked at Richard’s site but see that he does not distinguish between Ka and Kb types.

I have attached date pictures of my 1882Kb for reference.       

I also have a query regarding BP 1882Ma but will leave that for a ‘follow on’ post if there is interest in this one.

[alfnail 756]

Judging by the lack of replies I think I must have confused everyone.

I am pretty sure I have correctly matched my Kb with the small picture in MG’s book. The protrusion of the 1 half way up the inner curve of the 2 looks identical to me, in particular the curved part of the 1 which I have now highlighted in yellow.

MG does not, however, give a full date picture of the Kb, but he does show a full picture of the Ka date with what appears to be a die crack around, and perhaps a little inside, the 2. Whilst his Ka date picture is not high definition the numerals and H look as though they are identically positioned to my own full Kb date picture. This has left me thinking that Ka and Kb may both have been struck from the same die, but that Ka is just struck later after the die has become ‘flawed’, and that this flawing perhaps gives a false impression of a different 2/1 amended die. If members think this is likely to be the case then I do not need to go hunting for another Ka example.

Probably confused everyone even more now!!

[secret santa 2,013]

I've always been dubious about Ka and Kb being 2 different varieties and now your posts have convinced me that they're one and the same. I think that the extra marks on Michael's Ka pic may be a red herring (although I'm only going on the photos whereas presumably Michael has seen both coins in hand ?)

[alfnail 756]

Many thanks for that Richard, much appreciated.

I now attach a close up of my 1882Ma, where one can immediately see the different location of the H in respect to the border teeth and numeral 8’s when compared to type Kb. The protrusion of the 1 just above the inner curve is weak but can be seen on my example, but I would also like to ask whether other members have an Ma which also exhibits a tiny protrusion at the top left of the 2, as indicated by the red arrow. MG says on his page 79 “the only part of the 1 that can be seen, on this example, is the small portion that sticks out centrally, half way up the 2”. I think, however, that his picture may also have the tiny protrusion top left, which I presume could be the top left corner of the top bar of the underneath numeral 1. Please could I ask other members to check their own specimens and comment?

  

[jacinbox 36]

 

Calling Penny-bugs!!! Someone snapped this on ebay before I could, but can you tell me if this is what I think it is? The best way to find out would be for someone to tell me what is so peculiar about this coin. Based on your answer or answers I will know if I missed out on something mildly important. Thanks in advance to all those who tried.

Edited March 4, 2016 by jacinbox

[Bernie 188]

The colon dots do appear to be close after F:D  ??

[Nordle11 564]

Looks like an obverse G (Gouby) because of the centrally cut fishtail. One of the earlier stages (probably stage 1) because there is no crimp in the bow, although that could be down to wear?

Reverse D, LCW below the shield and toothed.