More Pennies

[Sword]

The bun pennies would have circulated for ca 100 years by the 1960s and would be in very low grades unless saved for some reason. Glad you kept it. 

18 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Nice find - beats any bun penny I found in 5/- penny bags (the best would have been 1890 1891 1892 in VG). I do remember switching to 3d and in the first bag I checked was a 1949!

That would be like finding a Kew garden 50p before people got crazy about them. Hope you have kept it too. 

[copper123]

TBH most buns had disappeared by 1968 - 69 probably many more were around in the mid sixties but then they were in terrible grade I  bought a mint bag weighing quite a few kilos from e ebay about a year back and found 2 1869 coins which corroborates the sellers story that they were unsearched 

[blakeyboy]

I've been offered 500kg of pennies from change, in copper fire buckets.

Gonna be £3k plus, due to the scrap.

Seller is adamant they are unchecked,

maybe true, since as I was talking with him on his market stall, I found an 1897 F148 'High tide' in one of his 10p tins....

 

All this takes me back to my dog-eared 'check your change' book, that went everywhere with me in the late '60's....

...Co-op, probably 1967, corner of Bewdley Street and Crowther Street in Kidderminster,

and I saw my mother receive an 1860- date visible only, but the oldest I had ever seen.....I think I still have it.....

 

[SilverAge3]

Keep us posted if you buy it. I'm curious. That sort of lot is probably rare enough there, and absolutely unlikely over here.

[Kipster]

Quick question regarding this 1898. It's a wide date of 11 teeth, but not the bisect variety. Is this a scarcer variety than the BP1898Ba and BP1898Ca?

 

[terrysoldpennies]

I would think the quick answer to that is no, as I would consider both the bisecting types to rarer.

[secret santa]

2 hours ago, Kipster said:

Is this a scarcer variety than the BP1898Ba and BP1898Ca?

Gouby says this variety (1898Ab) is "scarce ?"

But 1898 Ba and Ca are both "rare"

So, almost certainly No but I doubt that anyone has done a serious analysis.

Edited October 26, 2024 by secret santa
spelling

[Kipster]

Thanks both. 

Whilst on the subject of 1898's, I bought this other one at auction last year, described as 'prooflike'. The fields look quite hairlined, particularly when you look at the outline of Victoria on the reverse, similarly on the obverse. They all look to run in the same direction and not over the legends/bust, so could this possibly be just die polishing or something else? They are crystal clear with an illluminated loupe, but very hard to capture on a mobile.

 

 

[secret santa]

I think "proof-like" should be taken with a pinch of salt. The scratches look quite harsh.

P.S. Victoria is on the obverse; Britannia on the reverse.

[Kipster]

Yes, I know, sorry, I wasn't clear. When you look at the reverse, the outline of Victoria on the obverse can be seen quite easily, ghosting if you will, which seems to be highlighted more where these parallel lines appear. The lines on the obverse image above are all vertical, as are those on the reverse, and fill the fields on both sides, but there is still a great deal of lustre remaining.

[PWA 1967]

1 hour ago, Kipster said:

Thanks both. 

Whilst on the subject of 1898's, I bought this other one at auction last year, described as 'prooflike'. The fields look quite hairlined, particularly when you look at the outline of Victoria on the reverse, similarly on the obverse. They all look to run in the same direction and not over the legends/bust, so could this possibly be just die polishing or something else? They are crystal clear with an illluminated loupe, but very hard to capture on a mobile.

 

 

Thats just been cleaned as can be seen under the arm and to the right of the trident, with all the lines confirming it.

[Kipster]

All the way around the bust outline? Would've thought Baldwins would have picked up on that and mentioned it at least.

[PWA 1967]

4 minutes ago, Kipster said:

All the way around the bust outline? Would've thought Baldwins would have picked up on that and mentioned it at least.

Yes , plenty cleaned pennies are sold everyday.Just depends on what the buyer / seller thinks and will tolerate. some are obviously worse than others.The one pictured you obviously considered to be ok when you bought and received it and just giving my own opinion.

[Kipster]

I didn't go and view it as it wasn't that dear, and when I got it it was given a cursory look over and just put in the cabinet. Only now that I'm selling most of what I have is everything being given a thorough looking at. Oh well, caveat emptor as they say. 

[Peckris 2]

On 10/24/2024 at 3:34 PM, Sword said:

That would be like finding a Kew garden 50p before people got crazy about them. Hope you have kept it too. 

Indeed I have! Along with all my decent finds from the late 60s, which include the first ever 1926 penny I found - which, after several months and a very close look, turned out to be an ME - plus an UNC 1938 halfpenny with good lustre, an EF 1935 halfpenny with lustre, and a 1909 halfpenny in better than VF.

[Sword]

10 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Indeed I have! Along with all my decent finds from the late 60s, which include the first ever 1926 penny I found - which, after several months and a very close look, turned out to be an ME - plus an UNC 1938 halfpenny with good lustre, an EF 1935 halfpenny with lustre, and a 1909 halfpenny in better than VF.

The decimal era was well in by the time of my teenage years and there weren't anything remotely exciting to be found in change. Just the CuNi florins and shillings circulating as 10p and 5p coins. I still have some of the stuff I collected but they only have sentimental rather than numismatic value. But it has occurred to me that the "modern" commemoratives I saved  are not so modern now as decades have passed. The most notable set I have kept is the 1975 Panama proof set which featured then the world's biggest and smallest "circulating" coins. I would hardly be impressed by that sort of gimmick today. Even the humble rocking horse crown is now 89 years old and will soon reach "antique" status.

[terrysoldpennies]

17 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Thats just been cleaned as can be seen under the arm and to the right of the trident, with all the lines confirming it.

I must say that I agree and disagree with you Pete,   You must remember you gave me a beautiful wide date 1898 penny , well it has the appearance of a cameo as on close inspection the effigy of the King and of Britannia are matt finished , but the field is semi polished but also has some scratch marks .  These scratches run in absolutely straight lines up to the effigy , but not onto them , indicating they were made to the surface of the die or onto the planchet in the Mint before being pressed .   Pic. below.   In the case of Kipsters coin , also an exactly the same 1898 wide date penny  with the effigies appearing to be Matt finished with the field semi polished and with scratches running in absolutely straight lines right up to and straight through the legend with no curving as it crosses the raised up letters, as it would do if you scratched across a coin.    On Kipsters penny though it does look as though it my have been lightly polished around Britannia's arm . ?

[Martinminerva]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

also an exactly the same 1898 wide date penny

Not convinced they are from the same dies - Terry, your one's final 8 looks to be noticeably higher than Kipster's. Both jolly nice cons, though!

 

[Coys55]

On 10/24/2024 at 6:50 PM, copper123 said:

TBH most buns had disappeared by 1968 - 69 probably many more were around in the mid sixties but then they were in terrible grade I  bought a mint bag weighing quite a few kilos from e ebay about a year back and found 2 1869 coins which corroborates the sellers story that they were unsearched 

I’d have been 12 in 1967 and 11 or 12 sounds about the age I’d have been searching. I used to stay at my nan’s in Seven Kings in the summer holidays and get bags from the bank nearly every day, mainly pennies, halfpennies and threepences, but sometimes sixpences or shillings Never found a 1918 or 1919KN, 1869, 1950, 1951 or 1953 penny or 1946, 1949, 1950 or 1951 threepence. Lots of pre-1947 silver, but hardly and pre-1920  

I still have the albums. Mostly worn rubbish, but pretty nostalgic. 

[terrysoldpennies]

1 hour ago, Martinminerva said:

Not convinced they are from the same dies - Terry, your one's final 8 looks to be noticeably higher than Kipster's. Both jolly nice cons, though!

 

You could be right Martin , but the light when taking pictures can play some funny tricks . One thing is common to both coins though, is the tooth to the right side of the 8 has been cut on an angle to accommodate the positioning of the 8 over the tooth .

[PWA 1967]

5 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

I must say that I agree and disagree with you Pete,   You must remember you gave me a beautiful wide date 1898 penny , well it has the appearance of a cameo as on close inspection the effigy of the King and of Britannia are matt finished , but the field is semi polished but also has some scratch marks .  These scratches run in absolutely straight lines up to the effigy , but not onto them , indicating they were made to the surface of the die or onto the planchet in the Mint before being pressed .   Pic. below.   In the case of Kipsters coin , also an exactly the same 1898 wide date penny  with the effigies appearing to be Matt finished with the field semi polished and with scratches running in absolutely straight lines right up to and straight through the legend with no curving as it crosses the raised up letters, as it would do if you scratched across a coin.    On Kipsters penny though it does look as though it my have been lightly polished around Britannia's arm . ?

Yes i remember the coin Terry ,its only an opinion and that one i have seen in hand and was cleaned as i said when i posted it you, just the same as the one posted yesterday was.

Edited October 27, 2024 by PWA 1967

[terrysoldpennies]

Ah well Pete we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.  Below is a 1953 Cameo I gave to Richard , and as you can see it has Minute scratches across the field , but none of them cross onto the queens effigy which is clearly frosted . it is the same on the 1898  penny, and it would be impossible to polish the field alone without running over onto the raised surfaces .

[PWA 1967]

Yes we will disagree, i was happy to post it you free of charge and you were happy to receive it, perfect 👍.

Edited October 28, 2024 by PWA 1967

[SilverAge3]

On 10/26/2024 at 11:50 AM, Kipster said:

Thanks both. 

Whilst on the subject of 1898's, I bought this other one at auction last year, described as 'prooflike'. The fields look quite hairlined, particularly when you look at the outline of Victoria on the reverse, similarly on the obverse. They all look to run in the same direction and not over the legends/bust, so could this possibly be just die polishing or something else? They are crystal clear with an illluminated loupe, but very hard to capture on a mobile.

 

 

A video would really help differentiate die polish vs wiped coin. Wiped, the lustre would be broken. I have seen coins with very extreme die polish lines, and yeah, it often really only goes over fields (raised on die). Perhaps a well-lit YouTube vid of it being slowly rotated would help, or just make one for yourself (obv site has limitations of file size) . Also try a flashlight at various angles. 

[jelida]

Lines from polishing the working die would be raised, but from polishing the planchet would be incuse.

Jerry