absence of uniformity

Am I seeing thing's or is that a T over E in REG. I posted this in Unlisted varities because I cant find any reference to this. Thanks

1873: 1 to 6, 10 to 14, 16, 17, 19, 21 to 24, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 39 to 48, 50, 53 to 65, 67, 69 to 71, 73, 75, 76, 79, 83 to 89, 92 to 94, 96, 100, 101, 103, 105 to 107, 109 to 111, 113 to 115, 117 to 123, 125, 127 to 129, 131, 132, 135 to 137, 141

Thanks the image is not a good representation of remaining luster and the colour, I was playing with the ISO setting on the camera while the image shows nicely the depth of the strike the remaining luster is a higher percentage than the image shows and the colour is better aswell. I need to learn about lighting and practice more with the camera. Looking at sold examples of the 1904 this coin I think is roughly around the £60 price point. Similar coins have sold for quite a bit more and quite a bit less.

The challenge is to find a uncirculated 1915 with the thin defined ear, regret to say I have not found one yet.

Here it's clear cut, the "uncirculated" coin does not show the flat/worn areas on the face highlighted by red cicles on the worn coin yet the the top curved part of the ear on the uncirculated coin is not a thin defined line. I know strike and die wear are factors on this year. But how can a worn coin have a more defined ear if the ear is not recessed? Given its hard to find a sharp struck 1915 with or without a broken tooth if the ear is finely defined IMO its a recessed ear. It really stands out to me.

For me its all about the top curve of the ear, a thin defined line broken tooth or not, with overall wear to coin or not. The top curved part of the ear looks rounded without any flat spot. You can clearly see flat worn areas on this coin but the the top curved part of the ear remains thin and defined. Coins listed as uncirculated which are not recessed ear types dont have the definition to the top part of ear. For me thats the easiest way to know with or without a broken tooth.

Thank you

Thanks Rob, I managed to get a new set of images of the coin and infact the apparent difference in the 8 were because of the poor images and way the coin was photographed. In the new images the 8 looks normal. I did go on to look at the the silver Florins and become quite interested in the series. Interestingly over 50% of the Florins I have looked at for sale were listed incorrectly which leaves hope to find something rare misidentified. I found a 1879 42 Arcs no die number/WW listed as a different year.

Looks to be a decent sharp strike when looking at other sold examples on LCA. I can see what roughly these grade coins have sold for but Im interested to hear opinions. Thanks

What is your thoughts EF or better? I think it probably is slightly better. The coin is not needed for my collection, it was purchased as part of a lot to obtain another coin in the lot. Im looking to sell this one to purchase other coins I need. What would be a fair price please to list this coin to sell. Thanks

How do you think the edge of the die clashed almost central? Are the two dies not on a fixed axis?

Thanks ! Interesting coin.

Can I ask please out of interest have you seen Bronze pennies showing the same clash? thanks

OK thank you ! I really need to find a copy of Michael's book..

"One Penny 1881H with Low H, almost in contact with the linear circle, the top of the H just below the line of the base of the numerals, Gouby BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date spacing" Can I ask please anyone with Michaels specialised book is there a estimated rarity listed for BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date. Searching this forum no results are found. As far as I can see BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date is not listed on Richard's website. A single example of BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date is listed on LCA without reference to rarity. The coin however did sell for £300 listed as UNC. A similar grade coin with the same die pairing without the wider date and low H sold for 1/3 of that price. What I'm trying to figure out is the 80% remaining luster responsible for the tripling of the sold price or is it the low H and wider date. Thanks.

The image quality is terrible I know but unless its damage to me the 8 looks different. The left image shows a straight sided 8 where the top and bottom loop appear mostly equal with parallel sides. (This appears be to consistantly the case for the year and die pairing) The other image on the right shows the coin in question with more slanted shape and sides. It's most likely nothing. But its a good example of a question where my own research wont provide a definitive awnser.

Ok thanks yes I understand now, the last 1 totally out of place. I was looking for doublng or a number over a number. Here is an example of a question I cant awnser myself and I have checked all I can find with the same die pairing to see if I can see one the same. By looking at the attached image you can see the bottom loop of the 8 "appears" smaller than the top loop.

Please could you explain what's occuring on this coin, many thanks.

I accept the apology thanks. Maybe I was quick to get carried away. I know doubled or repunched characters are not of much interest I have learnt that. But some insignificant types or differences on coins have have been assigned freeman or gouby numbers and classed as more than insignificant although widely considered not real varieties. I dont have the all the book's and as far as I can see If one of the main specialist has written about a specific difference on a coin then it becomes something of interest. FYI i did exhaust searching for any written information about the coin in question. I'm quite happy doing my own research but if I can't find the a definitive awnser then I may ask the question. I started the question with I doubt it. I was just looking for confirmation of my own deduction thats all.

Since I have been accused/suspected of being dishonest and or a liar here my back is up. I'm just passionate about my new interest. Sorry if that's intolerable.

Whatever. Rob be onside or dont couldnt give a monkey's.

I started the question with I doubt it.. So no seeing these for the first time I wasnt classing it as a rarity rather simply asking the question for confirmation out of interest if nothing else.

In respect to this post tolerant of what? It's a valid question I asked is it not? It's not about making sides/ brown nosing. Im going to say it how it is. This is a public forum, keep it amicable or 🤐

Ok thanks.