Peckris

Why, are you sitting in a jug? I thought it, you posted it.

I thought the Ladies Loo theory was more interesting

LOL Rob. £50 was £50 in both £sd and decimal.

They weren't issued for use in Britain, but I can't remember offhand exactly where - Ceylon? I'm pretty sure that even back then, a third-farthing wouldn't have got you anything. The farthing was the smallest denom issued in this country.

It's impossible to decide lustre in artificial light, but I really cannot detect ANY wear on that item. Rubbing, especially on Britannia, usually shows up pretty well. While I agree it's good general advice to "pay EF and hope it's better", I don't agree in this case, or for any penny between 1895 and 1935. The discrepancy between EF and UNC values in this range is so enormous (5 times MINIMUM), that if you budgeted EF for this penny, you would probably lose it, unless you are very lucky. I would budget for around half the UNC value and if you can see it "in hand" and decide it's even better, you could then go higher. (Our posts overlapped - yes £20 sounds about right, but it could turn out to be BU in which case you struck lucky! It all comes down in the end to how much you want it.)

I was about to point out they were stamped COPY but you guys beat me . . . . . . . . . . . . to it

Don't see why not if we can have Fcuk on every High Street!! LOL true!!!

I can just see the advert now; 'L@@K rare 1967 Clacking Penny - a great opportunity to purchase this internationally acknowledged rarity' and in the small print; 'a few edge knocks due to the number of times I have dropped it on the pavement'. Hmmm... Go for it! Shall I put it up on ClackBay?

And most of all to 1912H which possibly has the highest rims of all? One reason why so many obverses survived in around VF or near to it.

Peck 2nd Freeman 1st North (never used) various Seabys & Spinks ESC Gouby 1st Jerraims Coincraft Derek's Grading Guide CCGBs Seabys copper coins and tokens (60s) Gary's silver varieties 1970 Coins & Medals varieties survey Rayners Milled Coins (rarities in various grades since 1672) 1972 Spinks 1925 English Milled Coins plus various lists and catalogues and auction lists acquired over the years There's others too but I rarely open them.

Are we allowed to use words like CNUT in this forum?

I have a 1967 penny (whoopee doo!) which is also an error coin, though no point posting a picture. It looks perfectly normal in every way, but if you drop it on a hard surface, it has no ring to it, it just clacks. Obviously it's not a forgery - the UK's commonest coin, almost zilch buying power even in the late 60s. Interesting though.

That pee water is overpriced whatever you pay for it. Well said that man! Back on topic - I seem to remember seeing a 1996 Silver Proof set in Phoenix priced at a hefty £245... and marked '£50 off'! I happened to be up there a few days later, so popped my spare set in my bag (I have 3, and cant shift the spares for love nor money!) and played 'dumb no-nothing commoner' ("It was my fathers hobby" or some rubbish) and was offered a princely £50 for it cash! Clearly I declined... On the other hand, you can get some quirky bits in there which can be quite fun... I picked up my 1996 set at auction for just over £50. It's catalogued for £100 and has been for years. £245??? Ye gods. Wasn't so long ago you could pick up a 1927 proof set for that.

I'd say keep this second one, which looks glorious to me.

Thanks for that Gary (all your research, plus the compliment, plus getting me to learn how to photograph coins). Yes, I bought this 1911 way back in the late 70s from Peter Ireland for £4.50 - I was drawn to it! It was probably a bit over the odds for it at the time, but the detail on it as you say, is superb (obverse - the reverse is average for the issue). When I found one with much more lustre - the other one I posted - I didn't have the heart to dispose of the earlier one. Glad I didn't.

Should do well! What's the silver value of that big slug currently?

Yes, that's a good question. My first thought was that they created master matrix dies for the whole of the 1860s then punched in the final digit as and when needed. But that makes little sense as so many were needed and struck for each of the first four years. But there must be a reason - for one thing, 1861s occur with the final digit all over the shop. Yet for 1862, many (most?) examples have the 2 at a slightly crazy angle to the 6 - i.e. misaligned but without the variation seen in 1861. Maybe the variation of 1861 drove them so mad at the Mint that they resolved to do it differently in subsequent years. And it's true, there's less crazy variation after 1861.

Yes, the 1973 is the bright red insert set. If the 2p only is toning, and it's not too bad, then you have one of the better sets Gary. The 80s sets were certainly better presented, though by then collectors were getting to be somewhat "ho hum" about the fact of a new set every year. The 1970 set is very easy to come by, but is also very popular as it's the only proof set for those types. If they'd only included the farthing it would have been absolutely perfect.

apart from the uncirculated 1946 and 1949 threepences of course...

Almost as interesting now would be to work out how it came to be in your aunt's possession (curiously I found a reproduction Elizabeth I 3d in my mother's effects). This type of facsimille is often used by film/TV or even amateur dramatic companies for period dramas, so did she have any connection with that type of thing? They're also sold by some museum shops I believe?

I have a problem with your question. It's this : I can understand why people would counterfeit currency £1 coins, it's been an epidemic almost since the day they were introduced. But why, given the difficulty and costs involved, would anyone bother to fake a proof £1 coin? Remember - these proofs are struck using highly polished dies on specially prepared blanks. Wouldn't it be more likely that the Mint's quality control (which as we all know seems to have been declining recently) had an off day, and the occasional rogue proof escaped? As to the details you asked specifically about alignment etc, I'll leave that to others who know more about that.

Okay just spent a bit of time putting 6 1911 pennies on the scanner, simultaneous scan with as near identical illumination and orientation as possible original scan at 3200 dpi >>> massive file, then a bit of cut & paste in Photoshop The Gouby X stands out like a sore thumb, can't see any difference in the rest though some have a hint of hollow neck. Suggest the term "hollow neck" be confined to the dustbin and that 1911 varieties are solely distinguishable by bead size and letter alignement David I really must get a better scanner, mine seems hopeless unless I'm just using it incorrectly! After yet another look at your images, Peckris, and those of David I must agree. Both Gouby X's stand out a mile but beyond that its hard to see anything else. I think I'll have to consign my 1911's back into their bag for another few years unless Gary comes up with something new. Ok, this is my five pennorth. Apart from the Gouby X (which is obvious), I'd venture that all the others BAR ONE are clearly to a space. The "one" is #5, or mid-bottom - that appears to be less obviously to a space, and the more I look at it the more it seems to be "left of a tooth". Whaddya think guys?

Nice one Peckris. Glad to see you got your camera working. Nice Pics. Results to follow but the weekend has not been the lazy weekend I thought it would be, forgot a couple of birthdays so it will take a while longer Run! Run for your life!! Ok, you're a cynic. But you're quite right - it is a B to tell, the only certain one is Gouby X which is 100% to a tooth.

Finally, a scan of my own Gouby X :

And the reverse (note, this is one of those where the date is not much more than half struck up; what looks like rubbing on Britannia's robe is in fact streakiness which you can see elsewhere too).