More Pennies

[jelida]

Not in the best of condition, and not cheap at $500 BIN (just over £400) but I am still pleased with this F27. The obverse scratches do not show so intrusively in natural light.

Jerry

[PWA 1967]

On 8/11/2023 at 9:46 PM, Martinminerva said:

Despite the awful photography of example 20, I'm convinced they're the same coin... Too many of the dings and scratches would seem to match up rather well - angle of lighting might account for why the deep dings on 21 seem much less deep and indistinct on 20. Plus of course the poor resolution and focus!

Fairly moot point anyway, whether there are 20 or 21 recorded specimens (I'm sure there'll be a good few others out there as yet un-spotted), but the fact they appeared on Richard's site sequentially just alerted me to the potential of them being one and the same!

Yes its definitely the same coin ,i bought it after the Auction.

[Martinminerva]

8 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Yes its definitely the same coin ,i bought it after the Auction.

Thought so!

[Kipster]

Picked up this rather nice one last week. The 15 leaf variety.

 

[PWA 1967]

Quite a lot of pennies in the next Baldwin auction.

https://thestrand.com/auctions/calendar/list#/auctions/5cec2514-7637-4f39-b576-3be0db39d6ad?q=penny&department=BDW&lot_status=all&auction_uuid=5cec2514-7637-4f39-b576-3be0db39d6ad

 

[pies]

F13

 

 

[PWA 1967]

Must have looked at hundreds / thousands to find one in a decent grade for type 😂

Gouby BP1895Bb Wide date.

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by PWA 1967

[alfnail]

Does anyone know if Mike Hopkins is ok?

He used to post several times a week, but I haven't seen a single post from him now for several weeks.

Thanks

[Peckris 2]

10 hours ago, alfnail said:

Does anyone know if Mike Hopkins is ok?

He used to post several times a week, but I haven't seen a single post from him now for several weeks.

Thanks

Is that 1949Threepence?

[jelida]

2 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Is that 1949Threepence?

Yes.

[PWA 1967]

One i havent had before ,although i must admit i have never looked for one 😀.

Thanks Larry 👍.

[Peckris 2]

On 10/11/2023 at 11:53 PM, jelida said:

Yes.

Let's hope all is well with him.

[jelida]

3 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

One i havent had before ,although i must admit i have never looked for one 😀.

Thanks Larry 👍.

One sold at LCA a few years ago, and I have subsequently bought one at the MCF and one on EBay. They are certainly very scarce.

Jerry

[terrysoldpennies]

Talking of 1879s , I think I got a bargain when I picked this one up recently for just twenty quid. 

 

[terrysoldpennies]

Obverse

[PWA 1967]

F803  "PennEy"  Model Pattern.

Although i have had two others this one much better.

[Kipster]

Picked up this penny at auction recently. An F139. The variety hadn't been noted on the slab so I think it slid under the radar. Not the most beautiful coin in the world with a couple of issues, but far, far superior to my current example, and picked up for a very reasonable figure (I think).

 

[Peckris 2]

Interesting that you called it "F139" - time was they were invariably called "2mm".

[Iannich48]

It is a nice F139 2mm anyway.

[terrysoldpennies]

1940 single exergue . A recent acquisition which upgrades my existing coin , a devil of a hard one to find in top condition.

 

 

[PWA 1967]

1854 4 over 3 ,not attributed by NGC.

[Peckris 2]

On 11/1/2023 at 7:24 PM, terrysoldpennies said:

1940 single exergue . A recent acquisition which upgrades my existing coin , a devil of a hard one to find in top condition.

I paid Colin Cooke £20 for mine in the 90s:

[PWA 1967]

1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

I paid Colin Cooke £20 for mine in the 90s:

Maybe its just the picture but doesnt look like one to me ?.

[Rob]

1 minute ago, PWA 1967 said:

Maybe its just the picture but doesnt look like one to me ?.

Looks like it to me. It is illuminated from below which plays tricks with what you are used to seeing compared with top lighting - raised features often appear incuse and vice-versa until your brain has been re-educated. In this case it is lighting the exergue face on from the source, making it appear wider. I can't see any evidence of two lines.

[PWA 1967]

16 minutes ago, Rob said:

Looks like it to me. It is illuminated from below which plays tricks with what you are used to seeing compared with top lighting - raised features often appear incuse and vice-versa until your brain has been re-educated. In this case it is lighting the exergue face on from the source, making it appear wider. I can't see any evidence of two lines.

You may well be right Rob ,i am often wrong.

What made me look twice though is on the single the waves merge into the line and on the double are on top.

I will put it down to the picture and my bad eyesight 😀.