Nordle11

I sent a couple of pictures to Michael (Gouby) and asked for his two cents; I regret to say that you have a totally normal 1863 – no variety, just slightly wider spacing.If you read at the bottom of my last book on page 28 I say. “This edition will list all of the date widths that I have found from 1866. I have omitted the 1860 to 1863 period, as the variations are extensive and range from the very narrow to the well spaced. The disregard for consistency in date width in those early years could possibly be due to the fact that James Watt struck most of the pennies between 1861 and 1863.” So there you have it

I'm ignoring the mark in the middle, even if it is a die number no-one is going to be able to say what it is so it might as well not be there. I just can't find a reverse die with the same 3.

Thanks Pete, I'm a stickler for the non-mint toned versions of this year and '44-'46. TBH any condition would be an upgrade from my current one, the toning lacks any eye appeal..

Another twelve month and he might sell it at £450 now I manage to upgrade mine the other day for only £40. I was worried about cleaning and he assured me that it's just the pictures, but that anyway problems I can return hassle free which is always nice. It's still on the way though.

What the hell is this..

It could be damage from pitting similar to the left of the lighthouse and around the ship?

Well it's raised more questions than it has answered.. There's something there but it's too worn to see if it's just a chip, strange for it to be so central though. Could there be a possibility that they filled the die number in and in became unclogged or even it becoming clogged over time? In any case, the 3 is what's making it so difficult to assign. Suggestions?

Super organised Paulus, what a sleek system! I photo and store mine in capsules in lindners as soon as I get them really, I forgot one coin once, but it was because I hadn't received it as opposed to misplacing it. Only when I noticed it on ebay under my purchases did I realise it was missing!

Cheers Jac, pictures in about an hour or so

No you're OK, I think it is a site access thing because I know that Brian (bhx7) has the same problem with not being able to edit. I'd ask Tom to edit it as Pete says, then ask him to give you access too

Try this for size. 1. Click edit here in the thread 2. then click full editor 3. then delete the attachments

First click edit and you'll see the first picture I've attached underneath the textbox. Then click the use full editor button and you can then delete your attachments (2nd pic)

It's just the button that takes you to the screen you get that allows you to upload pictures as an attachment. One sec I'll screenshot it

How ? Edit the post, look to the right of the attachment and there is a 'delete' button. Then just upload another. EDIT: You need 'use full editor' to do it.

I like how it was too late until you realised you no longer live there

Ah, no harm no foul

You should block out your name and adress on there Richard, I wouldn't trust the internet with it Great provenance for the coin though, thanks for sharing.

Indeed a little disappointed, but there maybe suerte yet! I'll get some microscpe pics when I get home tonight, but playing around with some overlaps right now, the mark you're referring to certainly fits the bill..

Arrived today, still not sure though I'll get better pictures later but it's in a flip now and my phone doesn't do close shots very well. Now I'm starting to believe that it's a 1963 with a die number 2 because of the positioning of the 3 and the spacing between it and the 6. Comparison shots here too. 1 - My coin 2 - Normal 3 3 - Open 3 4 - Die number 2 (Possibly this one) 5 - Die number 3 6 - Die number 4

Agreed. Seconded. Also if you need to add drawings to show the variety then it can't be all that exciting to have to find either.

Some close up pictures. It's still difficult to tell if the 9 is open or not, it looks like it took a whack at some point. Even without knowing if the 9 is open or not, it doesn't fit into the first 5 varieties due to the 4 not being slanted and being lower in the exergue.

Definitely NOT a gap filler Danz, that's a cracking coin! Love the chocolaty tone on it

Yes that's much better, I get 184 too. Here it is in tens, as suggested (different colour for each group of 10)

When counting I usually print it out A4 size and go around with a marker counting every 10, you don't lose count that way. Sounds like a great way to do it, it's nicer to have a pen and paper too. Do you have to find high res pictures to do that so the quality isn't lost when it's blown-up tp A4 size?