Cliff
-
Posts
176 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Cliff
-
-
37 minutes ago, Sword said:
"Strike thru" or "strike through" occurs when an object comes between the die and blank. An outline of the object is then left on the coin surface after striking.
Thank you
Cliff
-
Showing my ignorance but what is a "strike thru" please?
Cliff
-
It's had a wipe at least. Parallel lines mentioned previously very obvious in frankiew's first close up.
-
As a slight 'aside'. Would like to see the pic of the BP1863Ab if still available please. Gouby shows one in his 2009 book, I have one (not the same coin as Gouby's) and would like to see if there are more about (as per secret santa's earlier post).
I did PM davidrj a week or so back asking if a pic is still available but no response as yet.
On 8/22/2016 at 5:30 PM, secret santa said:Not as clear as Gouby's example and I don't think I'd be convinced if I saw it for sale as such. But there must be some others out there somewhere !!
-
Thanks for your contributions everyone. I'm 'away' at the moment but am keeping tabs via iPad.
-
Maybe making more of this than there is but I'm seeing slightly different pointings for the last T in BRITT?
-
Thank you all for your interest and for digging out the further examples Mike.
I attach pics of my two other F26s which show different legend v LC spacing and state of the LC itself. Forgive my ignorance but was the planchet already stamped with, say, the teeth and Linear Circle BEFORE being submitted for minting? (just my meanderings as to what may have caused the different spacing).
Seem to be back to "close to but not touching or intruding into the LC" but with different spacing?
-
Thanks chaps. I have a couple more F26s that I'll revisit later today. I recall that, although their Obv LCs in that area aren't 'of the best', the lettering doesn't actually intrude into the LC. Will confirm this evening.
I did have a look at Richard Session's example to compare and his looks perfectly normal, with BRITT being close to, but not touching, an unbroken LC.
Cliff
-
I have the attached as a 1861H F26 but have no recollection of having seen the displayed BRITT intrusion into the LC before. Your comments would be appreciated.
Cliff
BRITTintoLC.jpg.bca422d629bc7b5ab0a9a6751dd0682e.jpg)
-
I have a bag of forty one 1967 Pennies, majority AUnc or so, collected from change from different parts of the country. Whilst not as pronounced as Terry's example, I reckon the colon between DEI and GRATIA is oval shaped. The remaining 13 examples are circular, or not far off. I haven't looked at any of the other colons in any detail, just skimmed and, apart from the colon before DEI (which seems to be a little 'out of shape' on the odd occasion) they all seem to be circular. I haven't looked at any other year.
Do the attached examples qualify or are they 'fault in progress'?
Cliff
-
Michael Gouby shows two types of 9 for 1897 Pennies: Type 1 is where the centre loop is firmly connected to the down curved leg, Type 2 is connected by "what appears to be a thin thread".
Is the attached a Type 3?
Cliff
-
18 hours ago, DaveG38 said:
I agree that both the quantities struck and the problems of QC at the mint probably do mean that there will be many varieties of these coins. I've examined some 24 of these coins for 2016 so far and it is striking that there are variations in 23 of them. If I were to take say the 1967 penny, and examine just 24 of those from various sources, I doubt I would find any varieties let alone 23.
Having said that, the variations I'm finding are not miniscule, at least not when set against some of the accepted predecimal varieties. For instance, the differentiators for some predecimal types often include the pointings of letters to beads or to spaces, and also the spacing of letters and colons etc. plus, sometimes, the number of border beads or the thickness of the rim. All of the distinguishing features found so far for the 2016 £1 coins are of the same general scale. On the obverse of the new coins, the truncation can intrude into the outer ring, it can touch the ring, it can have a small gap to the ring and it can have a large gap to the ring. Ditto, the diadem can intrude into the ring, touch the ring or leave a gap to the ring. Also, the spacing of the obverse lettering from the ring varies. What is curious though is that there seem to be 10 variations, so far, of combinations of these features. Usually, with varieties you find a set of factors which combine to produce 2 or maybe 3 variants, but here there are a much larger number in a very small sample.
I don't think it makes any difference to the financial value of such coins. For the most part, they are worth £1 and that's all, but from a collecting point of view, it does mean there is quite a lot to look out for if you are a variety collector like myself.
As I see it, that is an excellent summary of my understanding of the situation and would like to take this opportunity to thank you for sharing your work (to date!)? I admire your undoubted dedication and patience. Hope your aching head has now improved?
May I request your breakdown for the different 10 obverses, 6 edge types and 15 reverse types? I've had a couple of eye cataract operations over the last six months, wonderful results, and am now in a position to appreciate (if not always take in!) some of the finer detail now that I can see it!
-
Further to bhx7's observation: I've checked my ten examples of which only one has the reeding to the left of the hologram section. My, left reeding example, also has the bimetallic circle almost passing through the tip of a Leek leaf and the tip of the portrait neck cutting below the bimetallic circle. This 'potentially seemingly scarcer' example was mentioned in DaveG38's posting on 12th May where he says that he has "yet to encounter" this example.
Has anyone else encountered the left/right reeding example and, with or without the tip of leaf or low portrait example?
Regards
Cliff
On 26/05/2017 at 7:43 PM, bhx7 said:Not sure if this has been noted. At the bottom of the coin around the edge. Below the hologram section the reeding is standardly to the right and with smooth to the left. I have checked about 70 coins up to now and have only found 1 that has reeding to the left. I know with the previous decimal coinage edge variation has been unimportant, but if this is the standard ratio then I would assume this would make a difference. Just an observation.
On 12/05/2017 at 6:40 PM, DaveG38 said:The two types I refer to in my post above pretty much equate to your top two photos. I've yet to encounter one like your bottom type.
-
On 5/16/2017 at 7:21 PM, AardHawk said:
There is no point in showing just the bottom of the coin. Lets have a picture of the whole coin.
Question. Dont you have a ruler or tape measure in your house? Thats all you need. I think you do, because I can see it to left of all your scans!
Pics as suggested, admittedly not the best pics ever but reckon they will suffice the purpose. Taking the given width dimension, point to point, is 23.23mm, I've measured 11.61mm from the bottom of the outer rim (using the ruler AardHawk spotted - thanks for the info) and extended the line across the coin. The graticules on the ruler are spaced at 0.5mm.
To my eye (I'm due to have an operation on Monday to hopefully improve my vision) I can't discern any positional difference in relationship to the portrait and the edges of the coin. However, and this may be due to my poor draftsmanship, or positioning of the coin, I see the line, extended from the 11.61mm mark on the ruler, in line with the top of the E in REG on the opposite side of coin 1. The extended line on coins 2 & 3 cut the end of the tail of the letter R of REG.
Points to ponder: There seems to be a gap(?) between the (top) metal inserts on coin 1, as there does, to a lesser degree, on coin 2. Coin 3 seems to have a snug all round fit.
Sorry I can't provide overlays or further illustrate my points. My Hypothesis remains that the brass outer portion appears to be of varying width, the center portion 'fitted' accordingly and the 'stamping' centralized. Very willing to take on board anything those of you in possession of a tape measure may wish to submit.
-
3 hours ago, AardHawk said:
I agree. It would be very useful if someone could measure to position of the centre relative to the coin rim.
Afraid I don't have the equipment (or eyes) to be able to do this, any takers please? In the meantime, here's my Heath Robinson approach:
I see coin 1's brass lower width to the inner circle as being 4mm, coin 2 as 4.10mm and coin 3 as 4.25mm (all figures are very 'ish'). Don't know what tolerances were worked to but presume Royal Mint found them acceptable?
-
Sorry to keep banging on about these 'placements'. Further to Dave's "quick assessment" posting and Rob's suggested "off centre" strikings:
Taking it as given that the portraits, emblems and characters are always the same size (as befits the Royal Mint technology) BUT, that there is some obvious movement. Is it then possible that the centre hole is not always exactly central? This would cause the inner ring (between to brass and inner metal insert) to appear in different positions on the Leek leaf and the truncation point etc). Having no mechanical knowledge I don't know how easy this variance would be to overcome when feeding in the centre portion?
I submit three examples (not at all scientific pics) of the etched hologram section and truncation point which, to my thinking, demonstrate my point - that the width of the brass section is not equal/central around the coin?
-
Sorry folks, seemingly have inherited multi quotes and I can't get rid of them and don't know how I got them! Would like to express my thanks to Dave and Rob for their informed responses.
Rob, I think your suggestion that the varieties may be due to off center strikes is probably the answer. If it is found that the Obv and Rev presentations are proportionally high or low at the same time would that seem to be due to the coin blank moving between the dies, rather than, perish the thought, any form of 'wobble' from the Royal Mint machinery?!?
My knowledge of the striking process is not up to much so please forgive my next question if the answer is obvious: If it is that, for whatever reason, the Obv portrait and Rev strikes 'move around', would that not also impact on the micro dates (Probably the inscriptions on the Obv as well but I haven't looked at those)? My earlier examples A and B show the probable vertical movement of the reverse strike BUT, as far as these old eyes can make out, both micro dates, and the horizontal lines fore and aft, seem to be in the centre of the 'inner rim'. Is the 'blank' not so blank when it's fed in, with the outer rim already having been stamped up?
Thanks for all your time and trouble
Cliff
5 hours ago, Rob said:I think it is a case of one (or both) being off-centre. Need a larger statistically significant sample size to confirm.
The gap from the crown to the letter looks to be the same and the rim on one is not cleanly struck.
On 4/26/2017 at 10:09 PM, DaveG38 said:- The only one I have seen so far is where the queen's coronet intrudes into the outer ring of the coin. Most appear to have the portrait entirely within the centre disc. A few have the top piece of the crown into the brass ring. Its also noticeable that the truncation of the bust is usually close to the edge of the inner disc, but on the 'intruding coronet' type there is a gap, as if the bust was struck off centre.
- The only other type, of which there are hundreds on ebay, are those where the centre has been pressed out and swapped round, plus there are some where the centre disc has been rotated. All post mint of course. Haven't seen any with 2017 on the reverse and 2016 on the obverse.
On 4/26/2017 at 10:09 PM, DaveG38 said:The only one I have seen so far is where the queen's coronet intrudes into the outer ring of the coin. Most appear to have the portrait entirely within the centre disc. A few have the top piece of the crown into the brass ring. Its also noticeable that the truncation of the bust is usually close to the edge of the inner disc, but on the 'intruding coronet' type there is a gap, as if the bust was struck off centre.
The only other type, of which there are hundreds on ebay, are those where the centre has been pressed out and swapped round, plus there are some where the centre disc has been rotated. All post mint of course. Haven't seen any with 2017 on the reverse and 2016 on the obverse.
On 4/24/2017 at 9:48 PM, Sword said:One type has the date 2016 on the obverse and micro 2017s on the reverse.
I have checked some of mine and realised that the micro numbers on the reverse are not always legible even on near mint condition coins.
I've checked six for the reverse dates: Three are OK, two not very good, one awful.
-
Example B:
-
My example B show the inner ring passing BELOW the leaf tip and lower down the thistle. The coronet headband is further away from the ring, as is the bottom of the flower stem. The ONE POUND LEGEND is much closer to the ring.
The Obv is not shown but, the top of the coronet intrudes into the outer ring (as mentioned earlier in this thread). There is now a gap between the bottom of the bust portrait and the outer ring.
These differences may have been discussed before and I missed them and would welcome comments.
Will send example B pics once the system allows me!
-
I received two coins this morning. On checking I find two reverse variations (perhaps allied with Obv variations mentioned in this thread previously):
My example A reverse shows the 'inner portion' ring almost passing through the leaf tip and towards the top of the thistle. The coronet headband is close to the ring and the flower stems almost touch the ring. The ONE POUND LEGEND is distant from the ring.
On the Obv (but not shown) the portrait truncation disappears into the outer ring of the coin, with the top of the coronet is within the inner ring.
-
On 4/24/2017 at 9:48 PM, Sword said:
One type has the date 2016 on the obverse and micro 2017s on the reverse.
I have checked some of mine and realised that the micro numbers on the reverse are not always legible even on near mint condition coins.
I've checked six for the reverse dates: Three are OK, two not very good, one awful.
-
-
My 1841 Penny has a colon after BRITANNIAR much lower than I recall seeing on other examples of this date. Does anyone have, or recall seeing any other examples? Is it a variety or one covered by Bramah's 2b type (Irregular Punctuation) perhaps?
There is 'graffiti' scratched onto both sides of the coin that I'm unable to make out. I see R ?? R under BRITANNIAR and that's about my limit. Will attach other shots to show.
Cliff
-
On 4/25/2017 at 0:39 PM, Cliff said:
Point to ponder: "1971 2P coin (new pence) Rare" currently on sale on eBay for £120, having been reduced from £135. Low grade with no explanation what makes it rare (except just the price perhaps?). Am I missing anything?
Silly me, on scrolling through the eBay offers I see another one for sale for only £9,449.99 and one for £25,000.00. I've already got a few examples of this date - must mean I'm rich?!?!
-
1
-
1883Bg Penny ??
in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Posted
Help please. Is the attached an example of Gouby 1883Bg (page 80 of his "The British Bronze Penny"? If not, would welcome your suggestions please.
Thanls
Cliff
Will try and attach full side shots