1849 penny

[mhcoins 95]

Good morning guys,

not an area I normally buy from but would like your opinions on this example (grade) and the value you's think it is worth? 

 

Thanks 

[IanB 175]

Looks in good condition to me. Nice detail in the hair, ribbon etc. I will take a punt and say EF but maybe better I would rather be conservative on the grade. As to value I will let more experienced people comment on that.

What condition is the other side like?

Edited March 7, 2017 by IanB

[mhcoins 95]

Thanks for the reply @IanB this is the reverse. 

[Coinery 926]

I would say most people would be trying to sell it at EF, but the reverse says NEF to me!

[Paulus 1,942]

I agree with Stuart, the reverse does not quite make EF for me either, EF/NEF

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Looks more like dirt than wear on the reverse and the right breast seems to be weaker than other dates so maybe not just wear.

EF or there abouts and somewhere about £1700-£2K.

Chingford would be my first enquiry and will probably shoot me down .

[brad 4]

I might need Specsavers as I feel the reverse is in better grade. EF £1500 for me.

[azda 973]

Send it to LCGS  (awaiting severe scolding from @mhcoins) you know i said that with tongue in cheek. I'm going to say EF, but a mushy looking shield and some carbon spotting around the trident area and some rubbing to the high points on the REV also

[mhcoins 95]

Are they still going ? Decided It's going off to pcgs for grading as they have a grading week at the end of the month. 

[Coinery 926]

30 minutes ago, mhcoins said:

Are they still going ? Decided It's going off to pcgs for grading as they have a grading week at the end of the month. 

Just out of interest, what's your view? 

[azda 973]

1 hour ago, mhcoins said:

Are they still going ? Decided It's going off to pcgs for grading as they have a grading week at the end of the month. 

Grading week is the 20th Alan, need to be there just beforehand you can hand it into them at the Midland fair on the 12th if you're up that way, i have 17 in. An MS62 1849 sold on ebay for $3,010 in 2016and the attached is MS63 

Edited March 7, 2017 by azda

[Cliff 45]

Following recent discussion regarding re-cut dates.  I reckon the attached displays a re-cut 4 (bodged repair?) and wondered if this then qualifies as "a variety" and has anyone seen this before?  My pics are at their usual low standard so would like to confirm that there is a serif (although faint/filled) over the I in GRATIA.  would like to hear your comments please.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 7, 2017 by Cliff
Removed duplicated pics

[Cliff 45]

[VickySilver 775]

I'll go EF on the OP and agree that there is a bit of softness on reverse but really like the obverse quality. Bit of toning unfortunate but not terrible. 

 

The MS63 that Azda posted is mine and better in hand - IMO undergraded and gotten several years ago from St James after a bit of bidding struggle. PCGS photo makes coin look darker than it is and artificially toned which it's not. 

[mhcoins 95]

1 hour ago, Coinery said:

Just out of interest, what's your view? 

Penny's aren't a denomination I generally buy so maybe my grading on them is slightly off however I felt the obverse was better than EF and the reverse EF. The wear looks like cabinet friction more than wear from circulation. The photos I attached are my clients. I'all take some tonight myself.

[Coinery 926]

Cabinet friction is a term I think is valid, often putting the reverse at a disadvantage, but there was a rather long 'discussion' about it, if I remember correctly, challenging that wear is wear. I think I lost!

I do love the big pennies, good luck with the grading, be interested to hear what it gets!

[secret santa 2,016]

Any cabinet which causes friction to a coin when you open it should be avoided at all costs - I believe it's actually a myth, or a euphemism for plain old "wear".

[Coinery 926]

Often used as a euphemism in the presence of unilateral wear I agree! Ultimately, when it comes to be graded, whether the wear happened in a Victorian's pocket (his storage facility) or 'storage' at a later date, they'll see it as wear, and grade it accordingly!

EF/NEF for me...how that pays itself out as a number, where digs, dings, lustre, tone, ultimately eye appeal, come into play is anybody's guess! I'd be interested, though!

Edited March 7, 2017 by Coinery

[1949threepence 3,366]

10 hours ago, Coinery said:

I would say most people would be trying to sell it at EF, but the reverse says NEF to me!

I'd got for EF/NEF. But a very nice coin and a neat capture, given the rarity of 1849. 

[1949threepence 3,366]

6 hours ago, Cliff said:

Strange colouring on the reverse, Cliff. Any idea what happened? 

[Cliff 45]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

Strange colouring on the reverse, Cliff. Any idea what happened? 

'Fraid not Mike.  Both the dark specs and purple tinge seem to be from within the metal rather than on the surface and hardly noticeable in the hand under natural light.

I use a digital microscope for my photographic attempts which, alas, does distort colours and is apt to give a blueish to things.

I confess I'm dubious about trying to see if anything cleans off, especially as the stains, to me, appear to be in the metal itself. Any thoughts please?

Cliff

[IanB 175]

Maybe an acidic fingerprint?

[Coinery 926]

I've had a couple of W4 pennies in the past with similar colouration. I personally thought it contaminants in the metal, or a poor mix? I never properly investigated it however as it was never a series I was collecting, beautiful as they are.

Maybe Rob or VickySilver could shed some light? I think I remember VS having some metallurgical knowledge?

[VickySilver 775]

Ah, let me hide! LOL! Well, difficult call from the pictures but I suspect some of the conjecture is spot on in that there are obvious alloy mixture phenomena which can be seen on some of the "blotchiness" on the obverse bust, but I have seen such (not necessarily PURPLE) marks be referred to as "palm prints", or basically skin oil. I do hear you Cliff on the artefact nature of the purple appearance.

The thought is that differential local alloy mixtures may oxidize selectively and provide subtle colour differences on surface metal. Corrosion arising from deeper metal as is seen in the most severe cases in ancient fourrees (sp?) would be more aggressive & probably not as likely IMO a cause of the reverse appearance.

 

Uh, well, more later...

[Coinery 926]

@VickySilver Quick work, Sir!