Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Recommended Posts

I compared it with the common type  Gouby Ab and the last 1 to the gap type Gouby Aa and i cant see any noticeable difference between any of them , but as both Aa and Ac types are so rare i would think that each were minted from just one die ,which would suggest that reserve dies were kept with just the first three digits stamp on to them and that they were later needed and had the last digit i.e the 1 inserted so as to complete the number of coins required . I guess this could mean that they were very slightly different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One i found recently NOT attributed BP1860JA in a decent grade.

N over sideways N (Z)

PSX_20210614_224039.jpg

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

1901 with the second one in the date directly over the tooth .  Blakeyboys newly discovered type , now listed by Gouby as type Ac 

237561817_1901last1indatedirectlyovertoothExcrarefinestknownexampleGoubyActerrys.thumb.JPG.b598677d3c39a67b25e1bc15e79f4866.JPG

Wow Terry you got one- better than mine too!!!

Nice one.

A rarity- I've never found one on ebay, only in accumulations as a surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this one also? The second 1 is pointing to a tooth.

1473085614_1901pennyrev.thumb.jpg.403cc1ab43ae70d0fa3d356e56121a84.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think so- I see loads like this when looking for a nice one like Terry's.

Sometimes I've nearly been fooled by the camera or lighting angle, but this is head-on..

I think the 9 and the 0 on the 1901Ac  have floated over a bit too.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

Don't think so- I see loads like this when looking for a nice one like Terry's.

Sometimes I've nearly been fooled by the camera or lighting angle, but this is head-on..

I think the 9 and the 0 on the 1901Ac  have floated over a bit too.....

The problem is that the lower bar of the one is indeed over the dot, but it's not BANG DEAD CENTRE over it. Chris's is just slightly too far left and half the bar is over a gap.  

I've similarly done myself in looking at potential F169's in much the same way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like a microscopic difference really. However to me, the 1 on the variety looks thicker than it does on mine. That might be enough to account for the "just about over a bead" versus "exactly over a bead"? So, same die, but the 1 recut perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 9 and the 0 move over.

I think Terry did one of his exerguial montages??

 

or was that a Depeche Mode album?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, blakeyboy said:

I think the 9 and the 0 move over.

I think Terry did one of his exerguial montages??

 

or was that a Depeche Mode album?

Is this what you mean .  And yes Depeche Mode .  Seriously one difference which Pete picked up on is that on the common type the 1 almost touches the tooth on the rare ones there is a gap between the 1 and the tooth

29296044_19014diff.typesofdatecommonsecdownotherthreeexrare.JPG.6f209e7cb74af024a871b663e8bf0335.JPG

Edited by terrysoldpennies
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant, Terry!

You are an 'EM' specialist now.

It does look like the 0 has moved over too.

Thanks for that mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what way is this any different from the date width variations found on most years of OH pennies? Genuine question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a good question.

I think it's just that it's been under the radar, since the spacings look even,

unlike other ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

In what way is this any different from the date width variations found on most years of OH pennies? Genuine question.

It doesn't , It just depends on whether you find date width variations interesting and wish to collect them on not. Many of them are ex rare but not many collectors are interested in them.  They a more common in early coins as would be expected and seem to have disappeared completely by the 1940s .   On the whole there inexpensive and new undiscovered types are still turning up.  Its the thrill of the chase for me ??

Edited by terrysoldpennies
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the gaps between the beads on the first and last 2 coins are slightly different. The first one being slightly wider.

So I decided to count them using Terry's and Chris's coins. Tapping a screen shot on a mobile phone using a 3 inch nail is not the way to do it successfully. I'll have to leave that to a braver man.

But check the difference between the P pointings and the first leg N in one pointings between the 2 coins.

If you take the first 1 of the date being directly above a tooth on all 4 of Terry's montage coins, somethings adrift.

Or do I need a Specsavers visit?

Bob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Zo Arms said:

It seems to me that the gaps between the beads on the first and last 2 coins are slightly different. The first one being slightly wider.

So I decided to count them using Terry's and Chris's coins. Tapping a screen shot on a mobile phone using a 3 inch nail is not the way to do it successfully. I'll have to leave that to a braver man.

But check the difference between the P pointings and the first leg N in one pointings between the 2 coins.

If you take the first 1 of the date being directly above a tooth on all 4 of Terry's montage coins, somethings adrift.

Or do I need a Specsavers visit?

Bob.

If you value your eyesight, NEVER go to Specsavers. My wife is recovering from a full retinal detachment following their failure - I'll say no more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DaveG38 said:

If you value your eyesight, NEVER go to Specsavers. My wife is recovering from a full retinal detachment following their failure - I'll say no more.

Goodness me, what was the planned procedure if I might ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Diaconis said:

Goodness me, what was the planned procedure if I might ask?

My wife started to experience some vision loss in one side of one eye. Went to Specsavers, her normal opticians, for an eye exam, who told here there was nothing wrong. A day or two later the darkness in the eye advanced further and so she took matters into her own hand, went to the GP, got an urgent referral and was diagnosed as having a full retinal detachment. She had a 72 hour window to get it fixed before loss became permanent. Rapid trips to London and in less than 48 hours, she had major eye surgery, retina re-attached, lasered and eye full of silicone oil. That was a coupkle of months ago, and vision is now coming slowly back - it may never be perfect, but it's much better than being blind in one eye.

Now, we don't completely blame Specsavers for failing to spot the detachment, although it is stretching credibility that there were no signs of it at all. What is unforgiveable is that they failed to refer her on to her GP, since she made it crystal clear thats he was losing vision. Instead they sent her away with false optimism and the idea that she should go back if things got worse. We will never go near them again. Total amateurs, only interested in selling their glasses. Eye health is secondary if it even exists in their minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DaveG38 said:

My wife started to experience some vision loss in one side of one eye. Went to Specsavers, her normal opticians, for an eye exam, who told here there was nothing wrong. A day or two later the darkness in the eye advanced further and so she took matters into her own hand, went to the GP, got an urgent referral and was diagnosed as having a full retinal detachment. She had a 72 hour window to get it fixed before loss became permanent. Rapid trips to London and in less than 48 hours, she had major eye surgery, retina re-attached, lasered and eye full of silicone oil. That was a coupkle of months ago, and vision is now coming slowly back - it may never be perfect, but it's much better than being blind in one eye.

Now, we don't completely blame Specsavers for failing to spot the detachment, although it is stretching credibility that there were no signs of it at all. What is unforgiveable is that they failed to refer her on to her GP, since she made it crystal clear thats he was losing vision. Instead they sent her away with false optimism and the idea that she should go back if things got worse. We will never go near them again. Total amateurs, only interested in selling their glasses. Eye health is secondary if it even exists in their minds.

I can only apologise for the flip remark and I'm pleased that she is in recovery. We all tend to take our health for granted until something goes wrong.

I'm sure that the whole forum sends you both all the best.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2021 at 4:27 PM, DaveG38 said:

My wife started to experience some vision loss in one side of one eye. Went to Specsavers, her normal opticians, for an eye exam, who told here there was nothing wrong. A day or two later the darkness in the eye advanced further and so she took matters into her own hand, went to the GP, got an urgent referral and was diagnosed as having a full retinal detachment. She had a 72 hour window to get it fixed before loss became permanent. Rapid trips to London and in less than 48 hours, she had major eye surgery, retina re-attached, lasered and eye full of silicone oil. That was a coupkle of months ago, and vision is now coming slowly back - it may never be perfect, but it's much better than being blind in one eye.

Now, we don't completely blame Specsavers for failing to spot the detachment, although it is stretching credibility that there were no signs of it at all. What is unforgiveable is that they failed to refer her on to her GP, since she made it crystal clear thats he was losing vision. Instead they sent her away with false optimism and the idea that she should go back if things got worse. We will never go near them again. Total amateurs, only interested in selling their glasses. Eye health is secondary if it even exists in their minds.

A qualified optician should always be able to spot a retinal detachment. But quite apart from anything else the symptoms your wife had, strongly suggest it anyway. Peripheral vision loss doesn't happen harmlessly. Treating a detached retina is - as you're obviously aware - a matter of extreme surgical emergency if you're to avoid permanent sight loss. Whoever your wife saw sounds seriously negligent. Frightening to think such idiots are testing people's eyes. Part of their job includes checking for eye diseases, such as glaucoma.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2021 at 6:57 PM, Zo Arms said:

I can only apologise for the flip remark and I'm pleased that she is in recovery. We all tend to take our health for granted until something goes wrong.

I'm sure that the whole forum sends you both all the best.

Thank you for those kind words. She is doing OK, but it is a slow process.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

A qualified optician should always be able to spot a retinal detachment. But quite apart from anything else the symptoms your wife had, strongly suggest it anyway. Peripheral vision loss doesn't happen harmlessly. Treating a detached retina is - as you're obviously aware - a matter of extreme surgical emergency if you're to avoid permanent sight loss. Whoever your wife saw sounds seriously negligent. Frightening to think such idiots are testing people's eyes. Part of their job includes checking for eye diseases, such as glaucoma.    

It is for this reason that I always advise people to avoid Specsavers. Who knows what other conditions they may be missing when they carry out and examination?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen, heard of, or experienced situations such as you described, my general mantra has been:

'When you have a situation that needs professional advice, seek a professional. And even then, get a second opinion.'

Unfortunately, too much gets by even the experts....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2021 at 10:39 PM, Mr T said:

Where was it published? British Numismatic Journal?

Yes, 1982 (vol.52) p.234-240.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2021 at 10:04 PM, DaveG38 said:

It is for this reason that I always advise people to avoid Specsavers. Who knows what other conditions they may be missing when they carry out and examination?

I went to them 5 or 6 years ago and was asked if I had any issues with my sight. I explained that the focus was all over place at times and was told that's impossible. So why ask the question if you won't accept the answer? I haven't been back since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks to a couple of forum members who helped me with the Gouby stages on this F15 i found last week NOT attributed.

They were initially doing my head in looking at the Gouby book ..........However i now understand them properly.

Thank you 👍

PSX_20210622_193441.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×