Peckris 2
-
Posts
3,626 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
170
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Peckris 2
-
-
I would say that it's pretty clearly a clogged die. Has all the characteristics.
-
4 hours ago, jelida said:
You seem to be talking about this coin on two threads , it really only needs one. How about photos so it can be verified and included on the database, which will make it more attractive. It really is quite hard to believe that you have found all these great rarities in only a couple of weeks when hundreds of highly knowledgeable collectors are looking out for them - you haven’t just bought someones collection? Are you a collector or a dealer? Most of us on this forum know a fair bit about each other (including in many cases our actual names) as members of quite a small community. At the moment you are just a moniker.
Jerry
I had thought the same - one great rarity would be very lucky, two would be incredible, more than two seems ... odd?
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, absence of uniformity said:
"The centre "A" bar is clear and solid. The coin I have clearly shows this. Nice to find one that has a MG number associated and from what I can see no other examples are known. When I look at the earlier prices for the F90 you can clearly see the early sales are higher value for worse condition coins. And as they have been discovered the prices drop off. Does this apply to this type?
Same location, same size, clear and solid, and same die pairing.
Yes, picture please
-
48 minutes ago, absence of uniformity said:
I know the 1915 is hard to find with a good strike uncirculated but in the image I have attached it shows a " Lustrous uncirculated" coin and the the ear looks partially flat at the top. The darker coin I have circled all the wear which is mostly flat areas not shown on the uncirculated coin and yet the ear appears to be untouched. How can most of the face show flat spots but the ear the highest point appears less worn than the uncirculated coin. Or is it a question of a weak strike on the uncirculated coin. That doesnt account for the wear on the darker coin and ear looking to be mostly intact with no flat area. I'm going to guess this darker coin is a recessed ear.
In my opinion the darker coin IS a recessed ear, the lustrous coin is a typical worn die strike - very common during WW1
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, absence of uniformity said:
In another post on this forum I found the following information;
1903 open 3 37,300
1908 F164a 55,550
1909 F169 23,200
1911 Gouby X 188,000
1926 ME 107,750
1946 dot 384,200
In which book or source of information could I find these figures for all types if it even exists?
Thanks
Those are estimates at best. Not sure what they're based on? Gouby estimates that the 1946 is rarer than the 26ME. And for example, although the combined mintage of 1918/19 Hs and KNs is known, the figures for H vs KN are only estimates.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Paddy said:
Note you are correct to say contemporary counterfeit rather than Evasion. The latter are deliberately varied from the original so as not to be classed as an illegal forgery. (Production of counterfeits was a capital offence!)
NOT correct, not for the USA where after independence in 1776 it wasn't a capital offence to produce and circulate evasions.
-
On 3/31/2026 at 10:50 PM, absence of uniformity said:
£340
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, absence of uniformity said:
this one look's nice aye ! sold through LCA
I'd settle for that! Any idea what it went for?
-
41 minutes ago, Bronze & Copper Collector said:
I have 2 still currently listed on ebay
I've got one in average circulated condition but I want one EF or better.
-
18 minutes ago, Michael-Roo said:
Thanks. I can JUST about make it out now you've told me, but perhaps you hammered guys are more used to knowing where to find it!
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Sword said:
It's amazing how the letters are so neatly and completely removed! (Almost looks like it was intentionally done.)
Don't ignore that the original Reddit post was made by someone called Brexit-Cereal... !
-
On 3/28/2026 at 8:48 AM, Coinery said:
Also, I too can see an H, but feel it’s just a collection of anomalies that create the illusion of one. This probably represents the view of quite a percentage of those who said they could see one, which likely puts the percentile well into the NO camp. 😉
Having dismissed the H as an anomaly, I might have to revise my opinion as I saw the face of Jesus on my slice of toast this morning...
-
3
-
-
On 3/27/2026 at 11:01 AM, absence of uniformity said:
Thank you Richard, this is what I would like to track down.
It was thanks to Michael's footnote in that - about the 1946 ONE' penny being scarcer than the 1926ME - that I finally managed to get Spink to include it in their Standard Catalogue.
-
On 3/26/2026 at 10:32 AM, Chris Perkins said:
Can also clearly see the 'WRL' on the reverse. Westair Reproductions Ltd, I think. They make replicas for museum gift shops etc and they always have WRL stamped on them.
You've better eyesight than me then! I was looking hard for just that but couldn't see it...
-
I'd be happy to rate that EF (perhaps AEF on the obverse, just a trace of extra wear on the hair?)
-
1
-
1
-
-
You're a day early...
-
1
-
-
yes, back to normal
-
Having ....
the ....
same ...
problem .........
-
9 hours ago, absence of uniformity said:
Im going to study the 1875 and 1875 H there must be an identifiable die characteristic unique to the H coins. Lets see.
On a relatively high grade penny like that, the H would show strongly. What you've got there is a ghostly anomaly, and I'd agree - no H
-
3
-
1
-
-
There is some noticeable scuffing on the obverse, but even so I would estimate around £1500 (EF)
-
On 3/18/2026 at 9:21 PM, david.bordeaux said:
According to the Proclamation of 30 July 1971, recognition of the silver crown, double florin, florin, shilling and sixpence as currency refers to coins minted after 1870. The florin (1993), shilling (1990) and sixpence (1980) were later demonetised leaving only the crown, double florin and Maundy coins.
The florin and shilling would still be with us if the Mint hadn't reduced the size in 1992 and 1990.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Martinminerva said:
Just one of the ubiquitous modern replicas... Not even good enough to fool anyone except an idiot.
That's very naughty. As you say, a modern replica 'aged'. It's not even a proper George V penny altered (e.g. 1935) which people are willing to pay up to £200 for in order to fill a gap.
-
1
-
-
You have done very very well! Edward VII halfcrowns in high grades are worth good money.
Let me get the least valuable out of the way first: the two 1902 coins might just about get £100 each, the 1910 perhaps £250, though more to the right buyer.
All but two of the others - 1906/7/8/9 - would be worth at least £300-£400 each, maybe more if we could see bigger pictures (the difference between EF and Uncirculated is the difference between e.g. £300 and £700).
Now for the best news: the 1904 - if nearer to UNC than EF has got to be worth well over £1000. The 1903 is the rarest (after 1905 which you don't have); it may have been cleaned, but should still be worth between £1500 and £2500, though it would be good to see bigger pictures.
Can you post a larger picture of each coin? You'll need to make several posts to get round the size limit for each separate post.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Anyone got a link to it?
R19 Bun penny rarity discovered
in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Posted
Fair enough. If you're putting in 11 hours a day 24/7 then you absolutely deserve the good luck you've had. I couldn't / wouldn't do it myself but hats off to you.