Peckris 2
-
Posts
3,469 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
164
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Peckris 2
-
-
Just now, blakeyboy said:
Exactly- it's not a surface thing.
If the strips from ( presumably) Heaton or Kings Norton were streaky, why were they not rejected instantly by the Mint?
Did they relax QC because of the War Effort? I have several examples of pennies that look like the molten mix just wasn't stirred...
It's quite possible - the War resulted in some vastly reduced standards in die wear etc. Plus we shouldn't forget that because of inflation there was a vast increase in mintages, plus there was a shortage of manpower. The Mint had their hands more than full.
-
57 minutes ago, craigy said:
were they gilt after or at the time, how do you spot later gilt ones ?
Later gilt will always come away showing an underlying normal dark copper colour. Or, where it's been 'painted on', the final effect is so obvious you can immediately tell it's not genuine.
-
2 hours ago, craigy said:
i'm pretty sure moulten metal will just dissolve instantly, not leave lumps of brass like cookie chips in a cookie ??
In addition to what @Rob said, the pennies I'm talking about look exactly as if bits of metal are stuck in them like chips in a biscuit. Not streakiness, but discrete little gold-coloured flecks (probably brass) that are embedded into the content of the penny, not simply on the surface like streaky lustre.
-
6 hours ago, mrbadexample said:
Can you show me what you mean? This is the same as any of the others I've seen.
Sadly I never scanned them - they're still in a Whitman folder somewhere. Sometime...
This, however, is my 1926 penny which is exactly like your streaky example:
-
3 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:
I'm not entirely convinced about the "brass shells in the mix" explanation - has this ever been officially verified? The reason I'm unconvinced is this penny that shows the typical "brass in the mix" effect but that predates WWI. I've also got one or two from 1918.
That looks more like 'streaky lustre' than the effect I'm talking about?
-
22 hours ago, blakeyboy said:
I don't think so! However, I can probably hazard a guess how it arose.
You may have seen some 1920 and 1921 pennies with gold coloured flecks in them. It's actually brass and appears to have been caused by the Mint putting unused shell cases left over from the War into the mix. I actually own a couple of these, and while I can't confirm the truth of the cause, I can certainly verify that there are pennies out there with gold-coloured flecks in them. That could well be the origin of the myth about 1922 pennies.
-
2 hours ago, Madness said:
Yes - The first one is very nice and I'm very happy to own it. Good extremely fine? The die looks to have been in good shape when it was struck. Found it on eBay and paid 60 GBP, which I'm guessing is probably better than a reasonable price.
pAS for me. I can't see any signs of wear at all. That was a great price for it!
-
Rob's "hot and cold" is relative. In one sense the decimal market has always been flat, for the simple reason that no dealer will ever come close to the over inflated prices that the Mint charges for new issues. To anyone contemplating collecting in that field I have one thing to say: "Buy only in the secondary market and never from the RM".
-
2
-
-
Not sure why you're unhappy with that first one? It's rather unlikely you'd upgrade that in a hurry.
-
1
-
-
On 30 September 2018 at 8:29 PM, sound said:
A question for me is why would anyone buy modern proofs? I do accept that, that is pandering to my own prejudices. So no criticism intended, but they just seem so boring and many.
I'm sure someone can make a case.
No, I agree with you. The early 70s (the first 3 or 4 proof sets) you can make a case for - no pun intended. However, it would have been preferable if subsequent sets had been much more sporadic. Individual changing designs or new denominations - the 20p, £1, £2, 50p, etc - would have been introduced as single issues in various forms such as regular metal, silver, and piedfort for new denominations.
The whole "several proofs each year" thing has just devalued the proof experience IMO.
-
I'm late to this thread - yes, it's Julia Domna; you can make out the MNA AUG to the right of her bust, and just discern the DO to the left. It's her portrait too.
I found my first denarius on the spoil tip of an archaeological dig in 1974 - a Julia Domna in VF. Sadly I was a penurious student when I got back to Brum and sold it to a dealer for around £7, a small fortune back then.
-
2
-
-
"One is not amused. How about ewe?"
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Peter said:
Bleedin Lanc (ies)
-
19 hours ago, copper123 said:
Lots of dealers from abroad who you normally never see and some lovely eye candy on many stalls
Any coins?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, rpeddie said:
my impression is all the modern decimal stuff is what the RM is supplying found "lying about"/left overs returned from post offices etc, they are not providing any of the pre-decimal items from their stores/museum.
Anything in the museum would be valuable and / or rare. Everything else got melted down?
-
3 hours ago, Madness said:
There's a lady who's sure all that glitters is gold....
Perhaps the descendants of Randy Wolfe, Spirit's guitarist, see something glittering
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-29/stairway-to-heaven-retrial-ordered-by-judge/10320680
Randy California, I think? They lost that case, hope they didn't also lose a heap of legal costs.
-
Three tracks from possibly the most underrated band of all time:
Rock, jazz, ballads - they had it all.
Plus the litiginously failed original riff to Stairway To Heaven?
-
1
-
-
You need a space between grams... and https for the link to work.
-
1
-
-
Sensayuma? Not us...
-
1
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Madness said:
Yep. Not happy with the 1787 Shilling I bought from Davissons, so have listed it for sale on eBay:
Do you think my description is fair, not a cop out and not misleading? Regardless of the grade, I'd like a semee-of-hearts variety to match the quality of the no-stop-over-head variety I already own. This one isn't it, despite the quality of lustre. Will just have to cut my losses.
Very fair. Tbh, if it was mine I wouldn't rush to sell it, but we're all different (thank goodness).
-
1
-
-
Certainly return proof coins that have been poorly handled, as these clearly have.
It's nothing new however - you don't see fingerprints on 70s proofs, but sometimes you see very bad staining, a reaction with the coloured inlays. 1973 proof sets especially it seems, it's rare to find one where all the coins are perfect.
-
6 hours ago, Viccy Penny said:
Did 19th century shillings & florins ever crop in change in this time?
I would largely agree with copper. However, it wasn't out of the question, and I expect on rare occasions someone would pull a (grim) pre-1920 coin from their change. It never happened to me but not impossible. Do bear in mind that the only factor in such coins that went up in the 70s was their bullion value.
-
7 hours ago, DrLarry said:
yes I note the putative nature of the error and will try get something for you I just suggest something might be happening with it and wondered if anyone may have seen the error or repunch too.
Why do you say C over G ? I'm more inclined to say a repunched C as it appears to be an underlying C.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, DrLarry said:
The whole debate on what constitutes a variety seems to me to have so many tight restrictions that I find myself becoming less and less interested in them .
What do you mean by "variety"? There are so many types:
- different mints e.g. Heatons, Kings Norton
- major design changes, e.g. 1927 reverses
- less dramatic changes like beaded/toothed borders, height of sea, position of initials etc
- die identifiers
- mules
- die flaws and fills
Just scratching the surface there (no pun intended).
Ebay's Worst Offerings
in Free for all
Posted
Sadly the pictures have gone to the Internet GRaveyard.