Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/26/2026 in all areas

  1. 1863 Slender 3 F44 Well I just can't believe my luck on this one, I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩
    9 points
  2. This was a recent pickup in a USA auction, I like the condition of the piece, it being much better than most farthings of that era - but I enjoy the additional cuds on Charles II's nose and Britannia's right arm from the die breaking down. Also it appears as though the numeral 1 in 1675 was repunched - almost appears to have been repunched over a numeral 5!
    5 points
  3. Found another quite good condition coin from the hoard..... albeit 2 pence Maundy, George IIII, 1822, 😕 not sure I can cope with all of these good condition coins after a life time of manky worn out ones.... 😕
    4 points
  4. This one, on an F16, has always intrigued me. Ghosting of Victoria's face can be seen (as it often does) above Britannia's left knee, but there is also something strange going on with the border teeth. The series of pictures at the bottom show an overlay picture of border teeth, from the same coin, which I have made gradually transparent from 0% to 100% as go from left to right hand side. This shows that the marks through Britannia's knees are clearly from border teeth. I bought this coin at Heritage in 2013 (MS63 Slabbed), and it took me a long time to find another F16 like this, to prove that it must have occurred during the minting process.......rather than the coin being hit with something post-minting. I will show the pictures of that other coin immediately below, as this picture uses up my 500Kb allowance!!
    4 points
  5. This is just about the most extreme example I have come across !!! An 1862 penny Note the half circle on Victoria's back , its the shield from the reverse side . The extra ribbons are created from the folds in Britannia's. dress
    4 points
  6. The double plume 1887 crown represents about 5% of the population. It is recorded and mentioned in a paper submitted to BNS blog but not yet published. Several of them were in The Thorburn Collection sold by Sovereign Rarities 23rd. Sep. 2025. notably lot 81
    3 points
  7. No way you’re new to this, your language and approach is not elementary, it’s very weird! I know it’s not helpful or constructive to say this but I am really struggling, I can’t pitch you at all.
    3 points
  8. It looks to me as if there was nearly a brockage, as the raised detail of the teeth is the incuse detail on the die. If a coin is not properly expelled between strikes, it will act as the die and leave an incuse detailed impression, because a die has the inverted relief, ie incuse is raised an vice versa, so to have raised 'incuse detail', it had to be a wrong-un, because the die would not have changed its relief and would strike normally, albeit off-centre. With several examples known, the detail must have been from a trapped coin.
    3 points
  9. Well, 1900 was currency. There was no 1901 crown. My understanding is that, much like in the US, people just didn't want to carry around the weight of the 25 g. coins. Here the casinos are the main reason they were in production as long as they were and were a big influence on the introduction of the Eisenhower dollar in 1971. Using the crown as the basis of a commemorative denomination was probably the best thing that happened to the coin. Of course, I don't tend to think they're too heavy ... Or too bulky... But then most things are paid for by me with the funny plastic card rather than from a bag of silver coins ...
    3 points
  10. Does seem a bit excessive. Many of them have the same 43.173. or 43.172 IP address range. I'll see what I can do.
    2 points
  11. Comparing it to my pair of 1844 crowns I'd say that's the top part of a cinqfoil. The star is larger and goes almost to trhe top of the N and I whereas the cinqfoil is smaller and goes about halfway up the letters.
    2 points
  12. That's the man. Splash out on literature. Spend 3 beers worth on a book instead of 1. As an aside and not referencing you as a subject, it never ceases to amaze me how many people consider spending as much as a lunchtime beer with a snack on literature is viewed as excessive and wasted money, when what they spend on coins has several zeros added to the same amount. It seems weird to me that people frequently won't buy the required tools to give them the knowledge required to increase their collection value, which is what they are trying to achieve. Bizarre. Not everything is on the internet, and that which is, is becoming increasingly untrustworthy. Everybody needs to tread more carefully than they used to with AI. A potentially useful tool that you can be guarantee to be abused.
    2 points
  13. I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:
    2 points
  14. I like this one 😂🤣
    2 points
  15. Not quite sure what you're saying? The Mint stopped using 92.5% silver from 1920 as the price of silver during WW1 had risen to the point where it exceeded the face value of the coins being struck. Yes, it came down again a few years later, but the Mint were never going to reverse their decision. The same thing happened after WW2 when silver was abandoned altogether but this time it never came down to make using it for coins cost-effective. I'd treat YouTube videos with a large pinch of salt!
    2 points
  16. Those prove my point about it being easier to see on more worn examples - the ear on those is far better preserved than you'd expect looking at the obverse as a whole.
    2 points
  17. Sorry for the delay, it’s been a mad few days! Blimey, Rob, really sorry to hear you’ve been in with sepsis, that’s miserable. That’s a lovely halfpenny you have there, and at an excellent price, especially when the example I quote sold for £375. I did see it, but had my eye on something else. I know it’s nothing of the class of yours, but I picked up an anchor halfpenny not so long ago…plus very limiting resources are always going to force some difficult decisions. Yours is the same die as the Comber, Wilkinson & Lockett example and, what’s interesting, is what initially appears to be a double-strike of the portcullis, is actually the bottom half of it being re-entered, it’s identical on each coin. What’s also interesting, is that the oddities beneath your portcullis are less prominent on the Comber example, excepting a few dots here and there, most notably in the bottom 2 squares of the vertical righthand row. Equally the horizontal bar running under the anchor on yours, which possibly hinted at a key (if that’s what’s being referred to), is also not present on the other example. I wonder if some of what’s being seen on yours is the die becoming progressively damaged? Re your trip South, if I’m not on nights it would be great to catch up…there’s a lovely riverside Greene King pub, 1 minute off junction 13, if that suits you?
    2 points
  18. I think it has always been accepted that the Double Florin was a further step in the attempt to decimalise the currency, so it seems even more crazy that they started re-issuing Crowns at the same time as the DF. I suspect we will never know the reasoning.
    2 points
  19. Yeah, my bad - though the 1900 mintage was twice as high as the previous two years; theory: after Victoria died, they decided to use up the 1900 dies and carried on minting with them in 1901. That would indicate that if she hadn't died, there would have been currency crowns in 1901 and maybe 1902 if she'd gone on that long?
    2 points
  20. I'd agree - the reverse is no better than GF, but the obverse (under the tarnish) looks better; it's not easy to tell but I'd say AVF?
    2 points
  21. Its a rotated die clash which this overlayed picture shows quite well.
    1 point
  22. Dont know if anyone can help please? I am unable to reply to messages and cant log out ? When i try to log out it says something like " Account suspended " although obviously i am in it now and have been for a few days. Hopefully makes sense and anyone who has sent me a message i am not ignoring you and just unable to reply 👍.
    1 point
  23. Should be ok now. At least the liking works and I just liked all the posts above. Adding images also seems to work.
    1 point
  24. I was also getting the account suspended thing. The host said the site was attacked by a DDOS attack (late on the 21st). It didn't last long but perhaps there are still a few wrinkles that need to be ironed out.
    1 point
  25. I never logout so can't comment on that. However if I try to see messages or notifications, it just spins forever without letting me in to see anything. Also, I can't seem to 'Like' posts - there's just a warning message about 'reacting to this content'.
    1 point
  26. Won’t even let me give you a thanks Rob 😃👍
    1 point
  27. Hello Paddy, quite right, I managed to find this on the web that someone else was looking into, a useful picture of the difference between the Cinquefoil and the Star 👍
    1 point
  28. Clearly not fully au fait when it comes to numismatic knowledge. Why point out a heart shaped pinprick hole, probably due to a bubble in the flan or a rust spot on the die, when there's a bleedin' obvious die flaw covering the first W on the truncation (or is it a naval cannon mint mark?). I think we should be told. Maybe somebody would like to suggest the mint mark to her and sit back to see what transpires.
    1 point
  29. Definitely not the genuine article, but will definitely be the coin in that little group that will catch the highest bidder out, as there’s nothing else in there they could possibly be wanting!
    1 point
  30. I am confident enough that it is a recessed ear, and that is good enough as it is going into my own collection. @Martinminerva also expressed the opinion that it was right in a previous post in this topic. I already have an example with the broken tooth in only slightly worse condition, so I will keep both to cover my bases. Neither will be sold until I pop my clogs, by which time I won't care anyway!
    1 point
  31. And yet another (this person needs the appropriate treatment) https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358558652610?itmmeta=01KRNYZFVFSVZCD2C7D3B07R5C&hash=item537bc2d8c2:g:1d0AAeSwnxZqBwHF&itmprp=enc%3AAQALAAAA4GfYFPkwiKCW4ZNSs2u11xBitEe9RDa3sc7hUT9hX%2FCOfxQKyq%2Ffk9mvXOGbDczpUO9joLFvUS2WadpYmPIOnOAlf0YszrS2sdD8A1SJuELkDUqma1VpZnEy5q4ZXojfFHwyhdE%2BTCVfVAmS%2BC97DrbSX40H4RetRi4Gu7VpPOYPQ8N2Oho%2FSa9VEl8vLNcwB7paH1zB721WMloM8o9WVt59UTO1G1T%2BdwM36QfBsO4lddL5fyB5pBoVMFq2o7jay63EgK9cPpx%2FOTWHxhuG%2FVF5GY2mna9%2BULIMUbH1ZCiv|tkp%3ABk9SR4L-_b7FZw
    1 point
  32. Great. A few weeks ago another that I sent to the USA was returned to me, no reason given. So I'm now a bit nervous sending to the USA. I've emailed you a PDF of the Irish book.
    1 point
  33. The light striations in the obverse fields indicate it might well have been wiped or cleaned in the past. As for polishing - is the mirror finish only in the fields but not the raised design (difficult to tell from those pictures)? If yes, then not polished, but if shiny all over then it most likely has been.
    1 point
  34. Hi Jerry, I was trying to show the mirror type reflection with the first picture. Also, it's definitely the genuine article 28.24 grams, specific gravity is bang on and sounds/rings like all my others. Cheers, Nigel
    1 point
  35. Try to take some clear photos of both sides of the coin, it’s difficult to comment on the images you give. There are some very good Chinese replicas available now and looking at the finish we need to rule those out first. Doubling in the strike would be a possibility, if we are dealing with the genuine article. Jerry
    1 point
  36. For what it's worth, I do not think this is a very rare thick flan 10+J but rather a normal flan one where the rim has been "rolled" in machinery and slightly compressed thus, and so makes the edge look wider. My evidence for this is a) this was commonly done with many, many bronze predecimal coins, I guess as people were just playing around with lathes etc in workshops, and I personally have many such examples of all bronze denominations and several monarchs, and b) from your photo, the rim itself next to the beads appears to be thin or non-existent, when in reality there should be a distinct rim edge surrounding the beads (see photo of obverse 10 below, taken from Richard's halfpenny website) which is basically where the rolled metal has gone from to form the "thicker" edge. c) The genuine thick flan is R20 for rarity, so VERY few known indeed. Of course, that is not to say another one wouldn't ever turn up, but mathematically one is more likely to find further specimens in the R17-R18 bracket, as you proved with your 1877 narrow date. But of course, one can only be sure when in hand and can be weighed, measured etc. But if you ask opinions from vague photos, be prepared to get vague answers, or indeed an absence of answers in light of the absence of evidence! I wish you luck with this purchase, just as you have had much luck already, but equally you must expect disappointments too... Also, give things a bit more time for feedback: you only posted on Saturday morning - I am replying Monday afternoon!
    1 point
  37. I suspect it may be related to the Irish obsidional currency , this article may give you a lead. https://oldcurrencyexchange.com/2015/09/03/obrien-rare-coin-review-confederate-catholic-rebel-money-coinage-of-1642-44/ Jerry
    1 point
  38. Business as usual, then! I still reserve the right to think you unusual, though. Keep going.
    1 point
  39. I agree - I find these very difficult to sport generally. I was fortunate this time that the next image was a 1916 in similar condition and the difference in the ears stood out, even to me! Here is the 1916:
    1 point
  40. This 1915 Penny looks very much to be a recessed ear variety, but seems to lack the broken tooth. Any thoughts? (Screenshot from online so no sharper image possible.)
    1 point
  41. It wasn't totally abandoned - there was a DF pattern done in early George V so they must have toyed with introducing them again.
    1 point
  42. Not only did the Double Florin prove unpopular at the time, it still seems unpopular now. Whereas a Victoria crown in reasonable condition will make much more than melt, a similar double florin can still be picked up at scrap or even less here in the UK. Anyone looking to make a long term investment in silver would do well to keep an eye out for cheap DFs at the moment.
    1 point
  43. Agreed, though there are exceptions like the New York 1960 crown which - though not a proof - has "shiny" fields and commands a premium over the normal ones. And don't get me started on 'mirror' fields! I remember bidding for and winning a complete 1887 Unc silver currency set at Warwick which more than one dealer there dismissed as cleaned. As the mirroring was in the fields but not on the raised elements of the design and legend, it obviously hadn't been cleaned. Oh well, my gain...
    1 point
  44. Oh yeah. I missed that.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...