Leaderboard

Over the last few months I have been recording my collection. Shortly before leaving my previous employer I had put my entire collection under the inspection microscope and photographed them. Although the resolutuion is great the end results have been mixed in that the colours have come out understated and many of the proofs show a flat field where it should be mirrored. Another problem has been that some coins have taken a purple ting which I believe is a fault on the file saving process. Anyway I was made redundent so I'm unable to repeat any of the picture. Anyway for what it's worth here it is. https://onedrive.live.com/?id=943941AD323D5647!135&cid=943941AD323D5647

Did anybody here spot this F32 at auction a week before Xmas? Sold as 1861 penny, but somebody else noticed it as it hammered at a grand, £1280 with costs, so not cheap but as nice an example as I've seen for sale in recent years despite a few marks. As usual the reverse F is weak, must have been a very worn die. Another for your list, Richard. Jerry

It is an OT, Ornamental Trident. If you are comparing with a PT then you will see there are subtle differences. The Colons are all over the place with Copper Pennies and Halfpennies. The fakes are more crisply struck and side by side with an authentic coin you will see the distinct design differences on both the Obv and Rev, I can't see any problems with this coin, CP1854 are a very large mintage and you can easily pick up very decent examples for relatively very little money.

If there is a secure place at work it might be useful to leave your collection there. Our university has a museum that might come in handy for me.

Every now and again some chump stamps "VOTE FOR WOMEN" instead. Always makes me laugh.

Bizarrely, me too- 1986, broke a watch, my father gave me his old one, and that was promptly eaten by a lift door when loading PA gear in flight cases into a Romford nightclub. Working with big loudspeakers and their huge magnets didn't fit in with my watches anyway........and I didn't miss the warty lump that I had for twenty years from where the winders would dig into the back of my hand....

It is not correct to assume that below DN 19 have obverse 4 and those 19+ have obverse 5. From the observations that I have made over the years, the only 5+A pairing I have seen is DN 23 and the only 5+B are DN 16 and DN 17. Almost all others are 4+A except DN 18 which is 4+B.

Exactly on that last bit. However, I do think attractive high grade 1926MEs are very scarce indeed. Many seem to have toning issues or just something that isn't quite right. I regret that my own specimen has lost some of its original wonderful lustre that was still there in 1999 when I bought it. Some of the 62-64RB slabbed bits really are IMO just not there as examples...

I gave up wearing a watch in 1986! (broke two that year and took the hint), so Tim Cook can stop wondering where his lost profits are.

Perhaps the intended use of the die at the time of its design and manufacture is what is relevant here, it was not designed to be used with the earlier reverse die, though it was, and presumably intentionally, in the penny in question. That does raise the question, which can never be answered I suspect, of how many of our 1860 and 1861 pennies are in fact mules, to go with the 1862 obv 2 and 3 coins which clearly are ‘intentional mules’? Better not get into semantics or we may all end up asses. Jerry