More Pennies

[IanB]

Thank you all for your comments. I am going to keep looking at it for a bit longer. Also going to try and get my work to invest in an electron microscope I am sure it will come in useful, for something.

As Pete said its a scarce one anyway, I was just hoping it was one of those really scarce ones that no else one has. 

 

[Rob]

1 hour ago, IanB said:

Also going to try and get my work to invest in an electron microscope I am sure it will come in useful, for something.

Who's your employer? Father Christmas? You'll struggle getting that one funded out of petty cash. If the business needed one it probably would have bought one already, or at least have a 3rd party facility elsewhere it can draw on.

[IanB]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

Who's your employer? Father Christmas? You'll struggle getting that one funded out of petty cash. If the business needed one it probably would have bought one already, or at least have a 3rd party facility elsewhere it can draw on.

I work for a University, STEM courses are the future. Will let you know if I manage to swing it

[Unwilling Numismatist]

18 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

if you do get one can I please book some time on it so I might get to the bottom of my silly theory or ask you to look for me LOL....I miss my electron microscope so much

You'd be suprised at just how much you can see with one of these £35 ones these days, they've come an awful long way.

 

[Unwilling Numismatist]

I think @zookeeperz has one of those fancy ones?

 

[Unwilling Numismatist]

I think good hardware with a consistent setup will do far more than a good post-processing package.

Polishing turds can be rewarding, but having something better to start with will always win!

[Peckris]

A 9 would be illogical unless they'd seen Back To The Future. My guess is that it could be a 5 - 1855 is a very common date for pennies.

[PWA 1967]

42 minutes ago, Peckris said:

A 9 would be illogical unless they'd seen Back To The Future. My guess is that it could be a 5 - 1855 is a very common date for pennies.

Yes Peck ,more likely to be a five than a nine 

[mrbadexample]

And this one? 

[Rob]

3 hours ago, IanB said:

I work for a University, STEM courses are the future. Will let you know if I manage to swing it

I'm surprised you don't have one already. Maybe a different department? It's worth asking the question.

[IanB]

8 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

And this one? 

Looking more and more like a 9 to me

[IanB]

7 hours ago, Rob said:

I'm surprised you don't have one already. Maybe a different department? It's worth asking the question.

I know we don't have one at the moment, but I also know we are investing in technology 

Edited July 5, 2018 by IanB

[1949threepence]

10 hours ago, Peckris said:

A 9 would be illogical unless they'd seen Back To The Future. My guess is that it could be a 5 - 1855 is a very common date for pennies.

That would make sense.

For it to be a 9, they'd have had to use an 1849 die, which would have entailed re-cutting the 4 as well. No evidence of that. 

 

[alfnail]

An explanation of it being a 9 was given on this forum link by Michael Gouby back in 2009. Scroll down to last text:-

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=6&threadid=712566&STARTPAGE=1

 

Whilst I don't have an electron microscope (did actually use one on Apollo moon samples) this is the best picture I have of this overdate using my digital 140x 

 

 

[Rob]

Well remembered. I don't recall reading that one.

[alfnail]

Interestingly this exact same obverse is also seen paired with two other reverses which do NOT have a large rose. This obverse exhibits progressive die flawing which commences at a border tooth to the top of the A of VICTORIA, and later develops through this A to Victoria’s head. Further flaws also develop at the front of the truncation to the border tooth 8 teeth to the left of the numeral 1, and also at the base of the OR of VICTORIA. This progressive obverse flawing gives us a timeline which proves that the large rose reverse is the middle one of the three reverses (which I know of to date) seen paired with this strange overdate obverse.

If any member wishes to see my detailed email with high definition images, which I sent to MG several years ago about this, then please PM me with your own email address…..as I cannot post images over 500Mb on the forum.

[PWA 1967]

10 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

And this one? 

Jon.............Can you please have a look at the reverse and tell me if its a large rose ,i assume the coin is W.W. ?

 

Pete.

Edited July 5, 2018 by PWA 1967

[alfnail]

Members may also know that in addition to this large rose reverse which is paired with the strange overdate obverse, there is also a second re-cut large rose reverse variety (different die) which is paired with a small date obverse (pictures attached for information). This small date variety to my knowledge always displays the die crack though numeral 5 and, on the reverse, has the ghosting above Britannia’s right hand, and a single mark below left knee. Also note the slanted colon after DEF, which is the type given by MG on his website as CP1858F…..for those of you perhaps seeking this rare variety:-

 http://www.michael-coins.co.uk/cp1858DEF.htm

Edited July 5, 2018 by alfnail
mistake

[alfnail]

For reference, and at same magnification, here are the two obverse date styles associated with the two large 're-cut' rose reverses

[PWA 1967]

Yes Ian ....I have just had a look at the two small date ones i have and the OBV / REV is exactly the same.

[alfnail]

Now, with my anorak on, I did capture ebay images of every 1841 to 1860/59 penny listed on ebay, every day for a full 5 years. I am gradually compiling stats on varieties, but have yet to do this for the 1858 large rose pieces. These images were captured before the large rose variety started to become better known by collectors (i.e. after London Coins sold one in Fine 35 for £600 hammer at their June 2012 auction) so I think when I get round to doing these stats they will reflect the full population quite well. My memory is that there were around a half dozen of each of the two types sold on ebay in 5 years, and that none of them was advertised as such!

   

[mrbadexample]

1 hour ago, PWA 1967 said:

Jon.............Can you please have a look at the reverse and tell me if its a large rose ,i assume the coin is W.W. ?

 

Pete.

Small rose Pete.

[Peckris]

1 hour ago, alfnail said:

An explanation of it being a 9 was given on this forum link by Michael Gouby back in 2009. Scroll down to last text:-

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=6&threadid=712566&STARTPAGE=1

 

Whilst I don't have an electron microscope (did actually use one on Apollo moon samples) this is the best picture I have of this overdate using my digital 140x 

 

 

The twofold problem with that theory is:

1. If 1859 dies had already been prepared, why strengthen an 1858 die for continued use?

2. Even more problematic - how does this theory account for the projection out of the 8 (top right) which a 9 could not have accounted for?

[mrbadexample]

It does have the die cracks through the A, and between the O&R of VICTORIA.

[mrbadexample]

As well as a 9 I think there was a 7 under there once as there is a pointy bit out of the top right of the 8. I suspect this die might have been recut more than once?