Hussulo

I make it out to be exactly 2 mm thick on my not so trusty household measuring tape. Link to more pictures.

Hi BCC, I received it today those are my pictures posted (sorry they aren't perfect just abit rushed tonight). It definitely is on a thicker planchet than normal and weighs 5.91 grams which is over weight (Freeman does not mention what F327 should weigh?). It is just about as thich as a young head half penny. What I need to ascertain now is whether it is a reverse M or K. If it is K which my initial hunch points to then it is either unlisted or a thick planchet error.

Hi all I recently picked up a thick flan 1876 H Half Penny, which I presume is Freeman 327 R18. The strange thing is that the date doesn’t seem to be as narrow as it should be i.e. reverse M. If you look at the picture in the book the top sheriff of the 6 is in line with the leftmost fold in Britannia's dress. On my coin it is in line with the second from the left, also I can't see any signs of a sandal on her foot. Could it be reverse K? Any thoughts, I haven't had much time to research it yet. Pic 2 weight. pic 3 date.

Very nice coin.

Hi Perkin, Welcome to a great hobby!

"It will no doubt be a helluva help to all of us in here" agreed, great topic and posts.

I agree, in my opinion the second 8 on your coin is definitely closer to the 5 James. "Is the date size issue as in height or as in spacing between beads here?" Hopefully Colin can elaborate.

James, That coin is the larger date variety (1A) on my site, it is amazing how noticable the difference is when you have the coin in front of you. I can e-mail you full size scans of the small date and large date coins if you want. It will enable you to see the difference.

Thanks josie!

Hi josie my site is still on going. I am almost halfway there now. I have calculated that there will be about 300 pages before it is finished to a level I am happy to publish it. I am stepping up the amount of time I am dedicating it so hopefully it will be finished in the next couple of months. The main site will be coinsgb.com, but I still own the coins.gb.com and coinsgb.co.uk domain names (I will just use them as a link to the main site at coinsgb.com. Once again many thanks to Chris, Rob, Tom G, Derek Gary, Andrey Tom H, and Geordie amongst others for allow me the use of their images!

I agree neat find. Could it not be a partially filled 5 on the die?

"George IV, trial halfpenny, 1827. Uniface trial piece struck on cowhide or ‘cow horn’ (not in Peck, but other trials were struck on leather, all very rare)" St. James Auctions Ltd > Auction 3 , Auction date: October 3rd, 2005 Lot number: 278 LINK: http://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotviewer.ph...cID=132&Lot=278

The new 2007 Sovereign recut reverse dies as shown on Lawrence Chard's website ===> http://www.goldsovereigns.co.uk/2007sovere...difference.html Personally, I think they have messed it up, and Pistrucci would not have been happy. Look at St George's face. A lot of detail is lost. Are those tumors growing on the horses legs? What do you think? good or bad?

Laminated flans are when the planchet (blank coin) isn’t perfectly smooth and you have an indent in the planchet. When it is then struck the coin has missing detail (indent). So this error is always displays an indent. You have to watch out for post mint damage. Die cracks are when from repeated use the dies do literally crack (I think the avarage die produces about 200,000 coins) thus when the planchet is struck, the metal fills these cracks and you are left with a raised detail on the coin.

It looks raised. If so I would say it is a die crack.

Hi German. I would say some of the scratches (white ones) will be on the slab itself not the coin. It is hard to take photo's of slabed coins. Nice coin.

Nice! another vararity to try and find now.

Nice find Rob. Do you have any close up pictures of the date?

Great Britain, 1696 Crown, Sharp VF/XF, PCI Slabbed Hmmmm VF/XF you say? Maybe it stands for very faint/ extra faint? http://cgi.ebay.com/Great-Britain-1696-Cro...1QQcmdZViewItem

I suspected you might have to go down this route and I don't blame you Chris. I'm sure their will still be great discussions and at least the guest's can still read them. They can then become members and post topics once they feel ready to. Keep up the good work!

Thanks Rob and Hussulo - I see what you mean about the doubling, I sure you are correct. The 'trial farthing' date seems to be the same as my 1838 farthings- and pictures that I can find of 1838 sovereigns. No surprise really as this must have been struck from a positive patrix (or working punch), that was then used to produce negative coining dies (that would look exactly like your trial). This I assume was a test that the positive patrix was OK. It would have been wasteful - and unnecessary to produce this in gold - when the copper blanks were available. So the fact that it is copper does not mean its a farthing!?. As much, if not more, of a sovereign trial as a farthing trial I would think. Double cool. Teg You have got a point Teg. It may have been a sovereign trial.

Teg, I too thought the B might be triple struck at first, but I think the middle B is actually the bottom half of the first B. I shall try to get a close up of the date on the trial farthing for you.

Yours would be a T2 Planchet Chris. There are two types of blank planchets: Type 1 - Planchets which have just been produced and are newly cut. Type 2 - Planchets which have been cut and then been through the next stage (softening process) which then display rims. I paid about £9 for it. I would like to have one of each type of major error. Hi Teg, I was told it was an fathing trial when I bought it. It is also the correct size weight for a farthing of that period.

I recived a great looking 1/3 Farthing today. I am nearing the completion of my 1/3 farthing set (excluding proofs and varieties). Link below for my 1/3 Farthing collection: http://s75.photobucket.com/albums/i317/hus...Third-Farthing/