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

2 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Is that 1949Threepence?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Thanks Larry 👍.

380139941_1313055942675554_1395696400302333399_n.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2023 at 11:53 PM, jelida said:

Yes.

Let's hope all is well with him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

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

Thanks Larry 👍.

380139941_1313055942675554_1395696400302333399_n.jpg

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

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F803  "PennEy"  Model Pattern.

Although i have had two others this one much better.

368048073_260432806977438_8419041430169194657_n.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

 

1895PennyA.jpg

1895PennyB.jpg

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

912293103_1940singleexergue.thumb.JPG.5977a31dc4244d4658d309552978f6c0.JPG1308414115_1940singleexergueobv.thumb.JPG.ad141f48e8bdb58ef3c04f739fe518b6.JPG

 

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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:

716953903_1940pennyobvrev.jpg.99be6c60025b75ee6ee15ec216b023e8.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

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

716953903_1940pennyobvrev.jpg.99be6c60025b75ee6ee15ec216b023e8.jpg

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 😀.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what i was trying to explain ,using pecks picture and Terrys to try and show the difference ,which although maybe the light and picture i am still not sure 😀.

IMG_9552.jpg

IMG_9553.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the difference between a strictly UNC example and - e.g. - GEF; the waves start to merge with the exergue line rather quick. Here's an AUNC 1939 reverse and you will see that the waves are still a bit distinct from the line. On Type 2 reverses there is a distinct gap between the upper line and the waves.

1773354880_1939pennyrevlarge.jpg.0c52ad7dbf80db996611789b54b7650b.jpg

Also, I believe that  the so-called 'single exergue line' is actually 2 lines so close together that they appear to be one? Correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Edited by Peckris 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This picture that Terry put on a few years ago shows the difference well.

The single has no line /s below other than the one thick one ,these are as in Richards picture the double.

Compare the third picture with the top two.

Regardless of wear they are easy to spot when you have seen a couple ,obviously even more so in hand 👍.

57c8188400987_datetypes4.thumb.JPG.a85d12bdbf505882496ab71722d8310a.jpg

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peck says of the first reverse that the exergue line is "faintly single" and of the second that it's "distinctly double". He doesn't go on to explain this further, but the implication is that the single line isn't clearly single, but - as others (I believe) have said - consists of two lines so close together that they appear (especially on less than perfect condition) to be a single line. I'm not sure what condition the 4th penny above is in but it MAY illustrate this 'grey area'?

My penny is all but BU so if it is the second reverse, the double lines would be absolutely clear - they're not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A rare 1896 Very wide date and eight years looking at thousands to find a really good one.

Gouby BP1896Ad ,NGC MS65 not attributed.

 

387472860_1481389086038368_1387072811687638677_n (1).jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

A rare 1896 Very wide date and eight years looking at thousands to find a really good one.

Gouby BP1896Ad ,NGC MS65 not attributed.

 

387472860_1481389086038368_1387072811687638677_n (1).jpg

Very nicely done. I was bidding on that as well and you pipped me to it. 👍

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spink's Coins of England 2024 has finally included my proposed penny additions of 1847 Medusa, 1858 Large Rose (although they have mysteriously duplicated the entry), 1862 over 1, 1862 VIGTORIA and 1863 open 3.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Spink's Coins of England 2024 has finally included my proposed penny additions of 1847 Medusa, 1858 Large Rose (although they have mysteriously duplicated the entry), 1862 over 1, 1862 VIGTORIA and 1863 open 3.

Do you know their pricing for the Medusa? 

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

×