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

   Rotographic    

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.

Nick

Accomplished Collector
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2,052

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Everything posted by Nick

  1. Nick
    The patch between the horse's hoof and the dragon's head could be cleaning, but it's not clear from that picture. What grade has NGC given it?
  2. Nick
    1889 shilling 2+C and 1898 sixpence 2+B.
  3. Nick
    I supplied them with a full list of varieties that I was aware of, with Davies numbers, but on the whole they chose not to use them. Hence the reason I have mentioned a number of them here.
  4. Nick
    Also in lot 488, is the scarcer 1893 sixpence with die pairing 2+A.
  5. Nick
    Just in case anybody was wondering, the rare variety of 1898 sixpence with the small date (1 of date to bead) is in lot 488 and not lot 487, even though it says small date for both.
  6. Nick
    And another is lot 486, an 1888 sixpence which is the 1 over 1 variety.
  7. Nick
    Another scarce sixpence variety that I neglected to mention is lot 477 an 1875 sixpence DN 71 die pairing 3+C, Davies 1085.
  8. Nick
    I have now counted and the the unrecorded reverse has approximately 20 more beads than the contemporary reverses.
  9. Nick
    Don't know the answer, hopefully 1887jubilee will. The 7 to bead indicates either a slightly different size of reverse or a different number of border beads (I haven't counted), but there are also a number of design differences in the crown (picture attached).
  10. Nick
    It is. The lot number is 355.
  11. Nick
    Many thanks for your input and for passing on the info to your friend. I don't think I have any other 1887 varieties of any great rarity, just the scarce R/V and JEB on truncation sixpences.
  12. Nick
    Here are the pictures (reduced in size) from VS:
  13. Nick

    1860 penny Freeman 14. LCW below foot.

    Nick replied to Martinminerva's topic in Wanted

    Personal bugbears are: haitch rather than aitch could of rather than could have or could've tautologies such as various different another thing coming rather than another think coming Amongst many others...
  14. Nick
    It simply never crossed my mind to do that.
  15. Nick
    Sorry.😳
  16. Nick
    I simply ran out of funds. But even if that hadn't happened, I would have probably have stopped anyway due to the lack of availability of the rarities that I was missing.
  17. Nick
    https://www.dnw.co.uk/auctions/catalogue/results.php?auction_id=598 Lot numbers are spread around, but 1869 sixpence is 471. If you want a lot number for a particular coin just ask.
  18. Nick
    Thanks Eric. You might be interested in the 1869 sixpence that you liked when I posted it a long while ago.
  19. Nick
    Here's the reverse, on behalf of VS.
  20. Nick
    Just read the description on your pattern on rascoins: 1951, similar to last but struck from unpolished dies, graffiti (Royal Mint, identification marks?) removed from obverse field, edge with polished finish and lettering of finer style, 27.97g., ESC-; L&S -, S.-, unlike the previous specimen this is fully struck, of the highest rarity, Ex. Rees-Jones (293, part). EF
  21. Nick
    I can't really see any difference in the design between your pattern and my 1951 proof (attached). I overlaid the pictures and nothing stands out. Is the reverse substantially different?
  22. Nick
    Here is mine:
  23. Nick
    Here's the original picture with a greater choice of "beauties". The only one that looks half decent is Gavin Williamson and I can't make up my mind about Dominic Raab.
  24. Nick

    Florin 1849

    Nick replied to palves's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries

    But if the weight and dimensions are correct, it must be made from the correct metal composition. It does look cast though.
  25. Nick
    I'm sure its bark is worse than its byte.
×