More Pennies

[jelida 1,214]

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Given the large 5 was only used from 1856-59, could the last numeral be a combination of 7, 8 and 9 ?

I think that is a real possibility, given that an 1858/7 die could well have remained in use into 1859,  and have been in need of repair to the second  ‘8’ upon which the mint worker instinctively reached for the final digit punch then in use - the ‘9’.  To me it certainly looks like a ‘9’ is in the mix.

Jerry

[alfnail 804]

I agree it's not a bad shout Richard (and Jerry).

Below are the 1858/7 variations in my own collection, so there are lots of opportunities for protrusions all over the place if some of those dies are then struck with a 9 as well.

 

[alfnail 804]

.......and of course there are a number of possible different '9' fonts to add into the equation:-

  

[Coinery 986]

Firstly, can I ask what you think the reverse grade of this coin might be (Sellers pictures, I haven’t seen it in-hand, yet)?

The obverse looks a clear unc to me, but the lighting/lustre reflections (or not) on the reverse are making me wonder whether I might have to downgrade that expectation overall? You’ll likely have made thousands more predictions of grade from seller photos than I have, so I’d really appreciate your insights.

Oh, and secondly, I don’t suppose anyone recognises it for a bit of provenance, perchance? The reverse, with its die-crack and ‘straight-edge’ toning at the second N of penny, through to the ship, is reasonably distinctive.

[copper123 1,427]

On 11/8/2023 at 9:20 PM, Kipster said:

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

I would go for a "9" only a guess though.

[Peckris 2 2,092]

8 hours ago, Coinery said:

Firstly, can I ask what you think the reverse grade of this coin might be (Sellers pictures, I haven’t seen it in-hand, yet)?

The obverse looks a clear unc to me, but the lighting/lustre reflections (or not) on the reverse are making me wonder whether I might have to downgrade that expectation overall? You’ll likely have made thousands more predictions of grade from seller photos than I have, so I’d really appreciate your insights.

Oh, and secondly, I don’t suppose anyone recognises it for a bit of provenance, perchance? The reverse, with its die-crack and ‘straight-edge’ toning at the second N of penny, through to the ship, is reasonably distinctive.

 

I'd go for a grade of AUNC on that reverse - it may in fact be UNC but the 'lustre wear' together with the fact that it's a slightly weaker strike than the obverse would make me downgrade it a little.

[Coinery 986]

5 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

I'd go for a grade of AUNC on that reverse - it may in fact be UNC but the 'lustre wear' together with the fact that it's a slightly weaker strike than the obverse would make me downgrade it a little.

Thanks, Peck, appreciate you commenting…not my natural playground at all, and all the more difficult to judge from a poor image.

I’m looking forward to taking an in-hand photo!

[alfnail 804]

I picked up this 1870 penny recently and, checking Michael Gouby’s book, I thought it was the missing date width Ad. On page 54 he references an Ac and an Ad, but not an Ad.

Michael confirmed yesterday saying:-

“I left the Ad reference free as I always considered that a 12 to 12.5 teeth gap would eventually be found….” and “I will keep your images for future reference……”

I guess this coin might appear in future revised pages

Apart from 1889’s I have not tried to collect all the different date widths, so I will be selling this coin at some point!

[secret santa 2,096]

I have one of these and noted that it wasn't recorded by Michael but never sent him the pictures. I can now classify it as Ad.

[Michael-Roo 781]

I have a 13 width. How unusual is this?

 

[secret santa 2,096]

BP1870Ae - Gouby says rare.

[Michael-Roo 781]

Thank you!

[terrysoldpennies 729]

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you both as your two coins are both Ac with the 0 just to the left of the tooth.  below is a picture of all the different date widths I have found , and an  Ae to compare with.

 

[PWA 1967 1,992]

You have confused me Terry ,not sure what you mean  "they are both Ac with the 0 to the left of a tooth  "?

The ones first posted are not over a tooth or 12 teeth ,they are to the right or do you mean the last two wider ones.

Edited February 10 by PWA 1967

[terrysoldpennies 729]

Yes Pete , Richards and Michaels are Ac,  and the one I have shown is the Ae  13 tooth with the  0 directly over the tooth.

[secret santa 2,096]

On 2/9/2024 at 12:30 PM, secret santa said:

I have one of these and noted that it wasn't recorded by Michael but never sent him the pictures. I can now classify it as Ad.

Terry is saying that this is 1870 Ac but Ac has the 0 to the left of a tooth

.

Picture courtesy of Michael Gouby

[terrysoldpennies 729]

On 2/9/2024 at 4:08 PM, secret santa said:

BP1870Ae - Gouby says rare.

Sorry Richard .This Picture you show is not listed by Gouby.  I failed to count the teeth on Goubys Ac which is a left of tooth 12 example , yours is a just to the left of tooth 13 and is in fact a 12 and 3/4 width  , where as the gouby Ae has the  0  directly over  tooth 13 

[secret santa 2,096]

I'm getting confused with things. The picture in your post above which I showed as 1870Ae is surely exactly the same as Gouby's Ae in the picture above ?

[terrysoldpennies 729]

The Ae has the  0  directly over tooth 13 as shown by Gouby. My coin is exactly 13 teeth which is the same as the Gouby  Ae .  But your coin has the  0  slightly to the left of tooth 13 so you could say its a 12.3/4  tooth width and is unlisted 

 Maybe I'm nit picking as the difference is miniscule , but there must have been two dies as in my example the 7 is high in the exergue and in yours its lower down below the other digits in the date

I trust I make myself perfectly obscure. 

 

 

 

Edited February 11 by terrysoldpennies

[secret santa 2,096]

OK - I think I understand. There must have many different dies, all with slightly differing widths. Gouby's Ae has a lower 7 so that makes your picture immediately above unlisted ?

Do you agree that Ian's and my examples of Ad are valid ?

[terrysoldpennies 729]

Yes I think your right Richard about the Ad comparison       

Terry

[PWA 1967 1,992]

A recent purchase i have not shared on here and scarce year in high grade 😀

1870 NGC MS65.

 

[SilverAge3 56]

On 2/11/2024 at 5:46 AM, secret santa said:

Terry is saying that this is 1870 Ac but Ac has the 0 to the left of a tooth

.

Picture courtesy of Michael Gouby

It's a shame Gouby won't ship his books here, i've always wanted copies (though some are now out of print). At least now i can compare my 1870 (a damaged piece, sadly) to this chart you posted from him. I'm thinking mine is Ab....

Edited February 27 by SilverAge3

[Peckris 2 2,092]

7 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

A recent purchase i have not shared on here and scarce year in high grade 😀

1870 NGC MS65.

 

is that the very rare 'lighthouse on lighthouse' variety? 😆

[martinross44 6]

Found an F14...