Freeman 14 Penny

[mrbadexample]

Agree same coin Mike.

[1949threepence]

12 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

Agree same coin Mike.

Cheers Jon.

[alfnail]

But it's not the only F14 with those flaws Mike, check out this one form LCA June 2017.

[alfnail]

There is also an F14 from the 2009 Crocker sale which looks like it has a flaw right of ship, different to other F14's. Unfortunately that is the best image I retained, did anyone here buy it?

Maybe a 5th F14 die!?

 

[terrysoldpennies]

I agree it does look different . Die 5  .    Has any one found an F14 without a die crack ??

Edited January 4, 2021 by terrysoldpennies

[Peckris 2]

22 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Well yes, but given that the die flaws on mine are also identical (this time to the third of the coins in Ian's 2015 posting), that stretches probability even further. 

Unless it's actually the same coin.

What I was trying to say was:

1. Person puts 2 (or more) pennies aside at the time they were issued. These would be strikes from the same die if got from a bank.

2. The pennies stay in the same family for generations.

3. In modern times the current owners decide to sell, which means two pennies struck within minutes of each other, appear on the market in a relatively short space of time, complete with identical die flaws.

[1949threepence]

58 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

What I was trying to say was:

1. Person puts 2 (or more) pennies aside at the time they were issued. These would be strikes from the same die if got from a bank.

2. The pennies stay in the same family for generations.

3. In modern times the current owners decide to sell, which means two pennies struck within minutes of each other, appear on the market in a relatively short space of time, complete with identical die flaws.

Entirely plausible, especially given that so many F14's seem to be virtually uncirculated.

[oldcopper]

17 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm certain that the F14 I hold, which I won at the Copthorne auction in June 2016, is exactly the same coin as the third variety shown in Ian's pics. Not only do the die flaws match exactly, but on closer examination every spot and blemish also check out the same.

 

Thanks, well spotted, I missed that. 

I wonder how the Mint managed to damage all 4 (at the last count) dies for this reverse, presumably in their manufacture? Plus bad E's on Alfnail's type as well.

[terrysoldpennies]

15 minutes ago, oldcopper said:

Thanks, well spotted, I missed that. 

I wonder how the Mint managed to damage all 4 (at the last count) dies for this reverse, presumably in their manufacture? Plus bad E's on Alfnail's type as well.

I would guess that the reverse E on the f14  was one of a set of trial dies that broke up almost immediately when they started to use the dies on the production line , hence virtually no coins if any survive without die cracks, possibly also the fate of the obverse 2* which all examples found up to now have serious die cracks showing .

[jelida]

I think that’s a very good analogy. It does seem so far that the survival of high grade coins in both instances is disproportionate;  I wonder if as possibly experimental issues whether many were held back from release at the time?

Jerry

[Rob]

57 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

I would guess that the reverse E on the f14  was one of a set of trial dies that broke up almost immediately when they started to use the dies on the production line , hence virtually no coins if any survive without die cracks, possibly also the fate of the obverse 2* which all examples found up to now have serious die cracks showing .

It could be an issue with the metal supplied for the dies as documented by the mint, just as it was 12 years before when the halfcrowns managed a mintage of 91872, mostly struck from recycled 1846 dies together with a few new 1848 dies. The same problem was probably the reason for the number of 1848/6 & 1848/7 pennies as the bar used for the dies was presumably the same for both denominations.

The metal stock used for a particular die would probably come from the same bar and be made as a job lot, not singly, so a wholesale failure of a particular reverse or obverse would be expected for that group. I'd go for that over a particular die being a trial because the basic design had been approved, so slight changes in the finer detail would be down to new punches, not the overall design.