tracyaw

Ah, have just examined an unc really close up and you're right Peckris. Oh well back to the searching

But I have other 1945s in similar condition to the left image, and and I have viewed uncut, they are the same as the one on the right not the one on the left. No other 1945 I have or have looked at, despite grade from poor to uncut, is the same as the image on the left, they all look like the image on the right. The date figures are the same as the image on the right. If the left image is slightly better than the right image, why do all other 1945s look like the right image?

Thanks Coinery To be honest, being new to this, I could not recognise a weak strike. (still learning) I compared both coins to an uncut one, and although I am sill convinced the dates are really different, and the lines on the sail rigging are much thinner on mine, and the bend on the back sail is quite different, do not know if these characteristics would occur through a weak strike. I am not sure how a weak strike would affect date numbers being very different, and the quite open C on the 5 and the wider space in the 4, and for me the 9 is the most distinctive of all, plus the angle of the 4, but photos can be deceiving. You are quite right. Groom does say that only minor differences are to be found on the 1940 Half Penny.

Never noticed before but the reverse is completely different, not just the date.

Thefleft image is the one with different date, the one on the right is the normal date as I have checked against 15 other 1945s and they have the same date. Which would say is in better condition? http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p328/rebelesque/IMG_0842.jpg http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p328/rebelesque/IMG_0843.jpg

Here is a version as a forum attachment:

They are not really worn and both in similar condition. I have photographed them again. All of the date numbers are very different. I can't see it being down a wearing die, as space in the 4 space is bigger and , as is the C curve o the 5. The 5 also has a different gap along its horizontal top line and the C curve. The 9 is slimmer with a bigger hole. Won't let me embed with the image tool on the toolbar so have to post a Photobucket again. Sorry. http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p328/rebelesque/IMG_0840.jpg

This is a 1945 Half Penny. Under a loupe the difference is amazing, however does not show up very well on photograph, the date on on the top one is much thinner. Is this anoted variety? If it is not noted I would like to call it the TracyZ Have some more odd ones to post later, and I did find a 1945 double, recut or whatever it is

Yeah Coinery I am in two minds about it but you're probably right. Thanks for the advice.

At the moment I am relying on Chris Henry Perkins, Collecters' Coins GB, which I find excellent, and also David J Groom for 20th century varieties. But I do believe Freeman and Gouby are must buys especially for Bun head pennies which I collect.

I am going to flog this double strike 1946 on ebay, funds toward my Bun head penny collection, if anyone has any ideas on a starting price much appreciated. I don't want it to go for next to nothing but would like an idea of where to start on a price

Thanks Just me,mine are nothing like BP 1945 Bb, very obvious

Thanks Just Me, just looked again, and I think I have found two, slightly doubled.

Thanks Peckris. Have many 1949s too, but never come across the 'Double struck 9'

A 1946 George VI Penny, with the Legend PENNY double struck? I have one and wonder if it is a one off. Would like to know if anyone else has seen one. Thanks.

I do use Michael's site quite a bit, because of the Gouby X's and other up to date info. I should have got his books ages ago. Thanks

Thanks Guys. Shall purchase a Gouby too

According to Spink's book, this variety has a top dot colon flaw after D at the end of the legend. I wonder why he makes this obversation when the flaw is also found on Obverse 2? As varieties can get very complicated I am sure it should be noted (or not noted at all) as the flaw is present in both varieties, and not present in both varieties. I think I shall trust to Freeman from now on, and have just ordered his book.

I meant to add but wont allow me to edit, that I have several joined, but was more interested in whet the gap should be like, a wide gap, small gap?

So the one in my pic is a gap, even though it is a tiny gap?

Thanks Nick. I tried that once before and it said the forum did not allow it. I amy have been doing something wrong. I appreciate you embedding them.

I am using tinypic, hope this helps better than photobucket: I understand that one of the varietiy obverses for the 1882, (dont know if both H and none H) are either joined or a gap. I have the tiniest gap on this one, but as I have never seen one and cannot find one to compare, is this the gapped reverse? Any help appreciated. Thanks. FULL IMAGE: http://i43.tinypic.com/2vkx6yc.jpg BRITT IMAGE: http://i40.tinypic.com/2ymbnfp.jpg

Thanks generic Lad. Shall give tinypic a whirl.

No idea what happened to the first one, the second image is blistering: http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p328/rebelesque/IMG_0211.jpg http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p328/rebelesque/IMG_0207.jpg

Ah, yes I collect them, but it is only recently I got into pre-decimal pennies so these two are the only ones I have come across on pre-decimal pennies. I Usually collect hammered coins and early milled. I have a couple of 20ps that have terrible die cracks, or strike errors, one has the Queen's face with what looks like a whirlpool, and one that looks like arabic writing scrawled down the Bust image. Sorry Peckris. I don't Photobucket either, after uploading a pic, I can never find them, but it's free and accepts large mbs