Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Mr T

Accomplished Collector
  • Posts

    1,159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Mr T

  1. What does the text around the rim in the first image say?
  2. Who's writing it?
  3. What extra varieties does it mention? I tend to stick to Freeman but also look out for any new dies as reported by Gouby and the penny people here. I avoid all flaws, date varieties, re-entered letters etc to keep things manageable.
  4. I remember reading or hearing about a 1000 mohur coin (15,000 rupees?) from India which was supposed to have existed in the 1600s I think. I doubt it circulated as such. Interesting reading anyway: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00routesdata/1600_1699/jahangir/hugecoin/hugecoin.html
  5. The image doesn't work - looks like you've tried to link to an email attachment.
  6. The image doesn't work - looks like you've tried to link to an email attachment.
  7. Ah, they are, but it looks like the mintage figures are omitted - devious. Perhaps write to the minister whose responsibilities include the Royal Mint?
  8. In any case, I've bought from him before without any trouble - if you're interested in the coin I'm sure an email will sort it out. More than likely the listing was copied without updating the link.
  9. I don't know if it's a fake - the strike is bad I agree but if you look at the image on Chard's at https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/1910sovereign.html it's not perfect either. It definitely appears to be a different coin to the PCGS photo though (http://www.pcgs.com/cert/31642079). St George's visor is better defined is the PCGS image and the rim nick just before OMN is missing. The PCGS images also show a rim nick between the R and E of REX which isn't in the other image.
  10. I think the acid route seems sound - my memory is that most acids won't harm gold (though aqua regia which I think is a mix of nitric and hydrochloric acid will) but given that the coin is roughly 8% copper I'd be a little hesitant.
  11. Surely the actual mint reports need to be publicly released somewhere?
  12. The beaded and toothed reverses are different too aren't they? The beaded one has an extra rock next to the lighthouse I think.
  13. I very much doubt it - I think I've seen a slab that says toothed border for an 1860 or 1861 - probably about as deep as they get into it.
  14. Oh right - I've used your site before but didn't notice the divergence. Thanks!
  15. I assume you're using Freeman die names and mean obverse 2 and reverse B? It's a bit hard to make out the fine details in the photo but the waviness of the hair suggests it is obverse 3.
  16. Freeman 103 is R19, Freeman 90 is R18 - I think the 103 has the (?) because Freeman found one very worn specimen and wasn't sure if it had a H or not? Can't remember the details.
  17. Yeah okay - the only Franklin Mint stuff I look for is the Cook Islands and Solomon Islands sets as they're the ones I collect - the 1982 and 1983 sets seem pretty uncommon and the mintages are in some cases (apparently) unknown.
  18. So where exactly is the signature function? I looked around but couldn't anything labelled as such. I did see an empty text box somewhere in the profile editing area but adding to it didn't produce a signature. edit: never mind, it's at http://www.predecimal.com/forum/settings/?area=signature, not in your profile.
  19. Really? That seems like such a waste... Where did you read that?
  20. I'm sure I've read that this has actually been done.
  21. Nice! Did the Franklin Mint cease operations part-way through 1984 or something?
  22. My chemistry knowledge never went that far but yeah, there's probably quite a bit going on - likewise the chemistry of an alloy is probably not straight-forward.
  23. That's true but the reaction between an acid and a base will produce a by-product and that's the risky bit in my opinion.
  24. Thanks Terry. Not a bad theory with the mint identifier - makes you wonder how the Royal Mint actually did test the output of the other mints when they didn't have something as obvious as a mintmark to denote who struck what.
  25. The neutralising the pH sounds pretty risky - unless you know your chemistry very well I think it has the potential to go very wrong. The ice method actually sounds half-decent though.
×
×
  • Create New...
Test