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


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.


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/29/2022 in Posts

  1. 6 points
    My latest coin. A common enough date but an upgrade. I included the PCGS picture as it is better than mine and reflects the coin well.
  2. 6 points
    I just dipped my toe into Conder tokens for the first time and managed to get this Warwickshire DH36, which is rated as RRR for rarity by DH, off ebay of all places!
  3. 2 points
    while this is your opinion I would say only 60% agree and a hell of a lot will point to 1849 pennies and 1860/59 and say whats the point when the coins don't exist?
  4. 2 points
    If it is a choice between collecting high grades and rare varieties, then I would go for high grades.
  5. 2 points
    Coin collecting everything in the best grades and all varieties remains a hobby for the rich and apart from america where coins have consistantly performed well . The challenge is making the best of your available recources , well for me at least it is
  6. 2 points
    Only just seen this! Wow, could easily be a 1967 BU penny, it’s that good!
  7. 2 points
  8. 2 points
    Put it back together, £2
  9. 1 point
    Indeed. Even a decent VG example of F169 is well over a thousand. But sometimes you see a worn rare silver variety with less than a handful of known examples selling for less than a hundred.
  10. 1 point
    Plus some very rare coins are literally an impossibility (up to known current specimens) to get above fine, let alone high grade. Such as the F90 and F169.
  11. 1 point
    Bruce, you might find this information from Michael Gouby, quite useful. In it, he discusses the 1858's at some length, including the variety accepted in some quarters as an 1858/3. However, he does not believe it to be so. Speaking personally, as we definitely don't know what it is, I don't think we can rule out that it might be an 1858/3.
  12. 1 point
    The true 1858 over 3 (or 2 as is now thought) always has a die flaw through the base of the date numerals:
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    I would rather it stays as a 1882/1 H
  15. 1 point
    Having now completed my Victoria copper penny series (with the exception of the Medusa and 1858 large rose, small date), this is how difficult I've found the difficult dates/varieties (a matter of availability rather than money):- 1839 proof - kept eluding me. Very difficult and the ones that did show up, very pricey. Had to eventually take the price plunge, otherwise I'd wait forever. Although if I'd waited, there's 2 at the upcoming Australian Noble auction. 1841 colon after REG: Scarce in mid grade. Very difficult in high grade. 1843 (all types) very difficult in high grade. No opportunity so far for anything above VF. Only sub fine for no colon after REG. 1845 - scarce at all levels. Finally got a decent one very recently (Interesting that although 1844 is technically, roughly the same as 1845 in terms of scarcity, there always seems to be 1844's on offer, but very few 1845's) 1847 Medusa: only saw the one on offer by Coopers Coins. Didn't buy for reasons now forgotten. 1849: A few available in the low to mid grades, but the high grade ones are excessively rare. I was extremely lucky with the one I got. Other than that I've seen an EF specimen, and the aUNC Waterbird example. 1853 PT: have to say, very rare, especially in high grade. I'm convinced Keith Bayford made a mistake offering a GEF example for just £125 1853 PT italic date: you just have to jump if you are lucky enough to see one. The fine example I bought from John (Stephen) Jerrams was sold as a PT specimen only. He didn't mention the italic date. 1854/3 - the real deal ones are extremely rare, and even more difficult in grades above fine. 1854 no colons - again very rare. Seen two, although probably a few unattributed ones have gone under the radar. 1856 OT - managed to obtain a fine example, and that's it. Dave Craddock did have an a/UNC with lustre specimen on offer for £1600 about a year back, but not surprisingly, by the time I called him, it had already gone. Excessively rare for availability at any grade. 1858 large rose large date: not seen one yet. 1860/59 - not as desperately rare as I'd feared, and did get an EF specimen with slight residual lustre.
  16. 1 point
    Nearly all Heatons. The book is based on them. It's a good read, although the latter two thirds I've not really bothered with as it's all about the Heaton coinage issues, most of which are foreign. The book is "A numismatic history of the the Birmingham Mint" by James O' Sweeny, published in 1981, by - would you believe - The Birmingham Mint !!! Although printed by Pardy & Son of Ringwood, Hants.
  17. 1 point
    I've bought two books from Rob. The first was a re-bound auctioneer's copy of the 1854 Cuff auction, and the other was quite recently. A book about the Birmingham Mint, which was from the collection of the late David Roberts-Jones, which Rob was disposing of.
  18. 1 point
    I also alerted them and I received a prompt and courteous reply. They were probably inundated with emails😂
  19. 1 point
    Obviously bought by a total nutter
  20. 1 point
    I was under the impression (wrongly it seems) that you have only started serious collecting relatively recently. The number of varieties in the series is so large that there will always be examples to chase.
  21. 1 point
    Missed out a 1849 years ago, n didn't meet one since then. Also, don't have a deep pocket for 1860, so give up already😓😓. However, if counting all varieties, OT, PT, etc and quality, I'm still miles away😅.
  22. 1 point
    If my memory serves me correctly the following would probably provide the most plausible explanation. I seem to recall reading about copies of coins made for jewelry purposes that were of the proper gold content. They were adequate for the purpose of the wearer but would not fool a collector or dealer. If you placed them side by side and examined them you could and would see the difference. However, if you simply did a gold content test they would match. Oftentimes they would be bought alongside genuine coins for melt. I have seen bracelets and necklaces with these type copies. They included British sovereigns, US $20 & $10 (necklaces), and $5 & $2 1/2 (bracelets, cufflinks & rings. Also Austrian 20 (not sure of the denomination) Ducats,, French 20 Francs, and Mexican 50 Pesos.
  23. 1 point
    F111, 2/1. Its a very pretty coin. Jerry
  24. 1 point
    How can RM produce so many errors and mules? Have they just got a big box of dies and some idiot rummaging around in it looking for two that are about the same size?
  25. 1 point
    Sorry, can't remember what dot to dot refers to - a clue would be good. All 10 pences have a beaded circle of dots inside the rim which can be joined using a fine pen. The larger, old style coins are easier to work with. Here's one I did earlier.