DaveG38

Hydrofluoric is about as unpleasant as any of the 'standard' acids, like hydrochloric, nitric or sulphuric, so contact with the skin isn't recommended. However, it does have the valuable property of disssolving glass - hence its use in the production of frosted glass.

So its hydrofluoric acid to strip it off older coins then!

I too have seen some desirable coins enamelled - most interesting was a 1697 crown. I've always wondered if it's possible to remove the enamelling. Is it just paint that can be removed with paint stripper or is it heat blasted into the surface and hence permanent? Being a chemist, at least by education, I ought to know the answer, but it all depends on what was used for the coating.

Just looked up the Edward Besley you mentioned and I find he is the same Edward Besley who was at college with me for a while in the early 1970s. We both studied chemistry, but he was in the year below me, except that I took a gap year and so ended up in the same year as him just before finals.

Telling evidence of a counterfeiter, maybe?

Got a few of these sources, but I'm also interested in tackling it from an academic/historical perspective as well i.e. by understanding the 'politics' of the Mint at the time etc. I might even be able to do this through an academic route over a number of years.

There has been much comment on here and in reference books concerning the wealth of varieties and error coins in the copper/tin series of the 17th century, especially William III. Mostly the comments revolve around the idea that the Mint was poorly run and the die sinkers were illiterate foreign workers, plus claims that the Mint's own records of the time are non-existent, yet I can't readily find much in print to substantiate these claims. Does anybody have any suggestions where I can find any detailed studies of the mint around this time or books that get down into what was going on back in Isaac Newton's day? I'm asking because I'm giving some serious thought to trying to research this area with a view to clarifying as much as I can, and I'd like to see what exactly is the state of play regarding William II's copper coinage. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

That's why the price has gone up.

Depends on the coin and denomination. The £100 coins regularly go for £130-140 on the bay. Ditto the £20 go for a premium. I failed to buy a 2014 set from the RM at the time and now they are sold out it its quite hard to find one at all let alone at the RM price, so for some of these, particularly the most recent, the secondary market is quite good.

Get to the back of the queue!

I bought one about 6 months ago for £1800 - I'd say mine was a little poorer than this one, maybe NVF overall.

Just received my copy and I can concur with class 3c for my specimen.

Apologies for the delayed condolences, but I've only just noticed this thread below the bottom of my screen. That's really awful news and very depressing for you and your family. I really am very sorry to hear your news. For me it comes at a time when two other people I know have died at quite a young age, and so this third is deeply troubling. I keep looking over my shoulder and wondering...... Anyway, keep going. I'm sure we are all thinking of you.

I don't know from any personal knowledge, but the cynic in me says its because proof coins retail for a higher price than UNC coins do, yet the gold content is the same. Sure, there's probably higher preparation and handling costs for proof coins, but I'd bet the Royal Mint still makes a healthy extra profit from striking proof coins rather than uncirculated.

He just has a problem with decimal points - obviously missed the one between the 5 and the 0. Or the one between the £ and the 5 ... Oh come on! It's a £2 coin, so a rip off would be £5 not £0.5 surely.

He just has a problem with decimal points - obviously missed the one between the 5 and the 0.

Definitely the latter.

Thank you for this - the photos are certainly much clearer than anything I have. Where do you all get these sources from????

I've looked through all the Edward I penny types illustrated in Coincraft's 1997 catalogue and I'm blowed if I can see any clear identifiers that would allow it to be attributed. My example seems to have a few charcteristics of one type, but a couple of a different one and so on. Spink's catalogue is useless as the photos are too small and the descriptors are impossible to use. Is there a better source of clear illustrations of what to look for in each class?

Bought this cheaply recently. Sold as Class 3c, but based on the Coincraft Catalogue, I can't see a class 3c here. Anybody help?

I've just bought a UNC 1886 penny, which it turms out is an 8 over 8. Does this carry a premium over the plain date type? Sorry dave i dont think so just a variety that is miniscule .It was just an impulse buy for me as i didnt have one. Oh well. I always live in hope.

I've just bought a UNC 1886 penny, which it turms out is an 8 over 8. Does this carry a premium over the plain date type?

Thanks for this assessment. Leaves me with a problem. Do I keep It even though I don't collect Maundy or do I sell it. If I sell would I be best off trying to put a set together or do Maundy sell best separately? Choices, choices.

Here's a pic of the 3d. Fields are very reflective, although this doesn't show in the pic.

The piece I have is AUNC, certainly has very reflective fields and I have to admit the hair and moustache both look very sharp, so it may well be a Maundy piece.