Leaderboard

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 🤩

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!

Its a rotated die clash which this overlayed picture shows quite well.

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.... 😕

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

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.

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.

It suddenly occurred to me the other day I had put a bid in for a nice looking penny on eBay. I had to put the bid in early as I had a long drive when it was due to mature. By the time I got home the auction was over. Now here is my conundrum. I could check with the web site to see if I had been successful or not. But if I did I might have failed in my bid and had lost the coin. However, if I don’t check it out I could still hold the winning bid, but I won’t know until I looked at the listing. Therefor, I might have won that coin, or not, until I find out one way or the other. I( I have lost the bid then I would be disappointed, so am I in a better position by not looking? Unless I have won it.

Loddy Heck!!! errrmmmm... This George V 1911 2 pence Maundy is also in nice condition as well 😕 I don't no how has happed but its in nice condition all the same. 👍

I don't think 1927 proof coins are unloved, I just think that a mintage of 15k for a proof coin is not low, and comfortably satisfies the demand of people who wants one. In addition the series also has a large number of circulating coins at UNC giving anyone an opportunity to get a type example. The 1887 proof crown on the other hand has a mintage of only about 1k (and there are far fewer circulating UNC examples).

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.

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.

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.

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:

I like this one 😂🤣

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!

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.

I have a 1927 set in an identical box even down to the remains of tape on the back of the box. I don't know if any 1928 proof sets were ever issued but this looks like a cobbled together set of 1928 coins presented in a 1927 proof set box to trap the unwary at a high price.

The only example I have seen in hand which is completely unambiguous was the Adams coin. You will see that the underlying 3 determines the profile of the last digit with the 3 clearly present, but also clearly overpunched with a 5 given the vertical section to the left on the upper part of the digit. I have seen various others which purported to be over 3, but none with the same profile and arguably contentious. The 1845 over ? that I had stolen at the Midland last year looked to be to be more likely over a different font 5 than a 4 or a 3, but 4 would be a good call if not a 5. Not to say that the coins with a taller 5 are not over 3, but definitely a case of caveat emptor IMO. There are many coins listed as such, but most are reliant on the vendor's description. There is one coin listed on ebay that I thought unusual which is claimed to be 5/3, but it was the irregularity of the date which caught my eye. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/335246363284

I'm not into stacking but I always thought the Britannia looked good. Just because I think that it’s a nice looking silver coin, I added a 1 oz. .999 fine silver Britannia to my collection. Mostly these are aimed at silver bugs but eh, I like it. By letting them send a random year, it was like $10~15 cheaper but I think I got lucky - Liz’s portrait is better than Charlie’s, IMO. From 2018:

It's not a common flaw and I am not certain if I have seen it before. In this grade, the flaw wouldn't make a difference. Both the obverse and reverse designs are really nice.

I have found........., 4th bust 1673 KM# 438.1VICESIMO QVINTO 1673 KM# 438.2plume below bust 1673 KM# 438.3centre plume reverse I've not found references to stops, hopefully others will chip in with more information ... 👍

Not much fun in Stalingrad, no. You need the A361, Barnstaple section....

I agree with Peckris that the loss of details is virtually all due to weak striking. Otherwise, wear would be very obvious in other areas like the garter letterings. And with these 0.50 silver points, areas of wear would show discolouration. If there is still lustre on the top of the shield area, then it's another indication that it is weak striking. You can still try to upgrade to specimens that are fully struck!

I would say poor strike, as the lettering on the garter is perfect, and that's among the first areas to wear. Difficult to grade without seeing in hand, but I would say the second one is AUNC.

Yes, that one is definitely a Star stop.

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'.

Again I can’t say thanks Stuart 😃👍, thought it was probably just me doing something wrong 👍

Try logging in on a different browser (or using incognito mode in Chrome, others have in private browsing too). This should allow you to see if it's a site issue or not (and hopefully allow you to reply!).

Won’t even let me give you a thanks Rob 😃👍

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 👍

I had not heard this determining key before. Thank you.

That's supposed to be silver??

I don't think Charlie would be too impressed with truck loads of cupro - nickel dumped in front of the palace.

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

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.

Good pictures, nice coin. It will tone well on a sunny windowsill , turned from time to time . Jerry

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.

all, I recently found what I believe could be a medieval coin while metal detecting in a cornfield in Castletown, Celbridge (Ireland), and I’m hoping to get some opinions on it. The piece is quite small — smaller and thinner than a modern 2 cent coin. It appears worn, but I can make out what looks like a cross on one side. There are also some pellet-like markings, and possibly a letter (maybe an “A”) beneath them, though it’s not very clear. The shape isn’t perfectly round, which made me wonder if it could be clipped, broken from a larger coin, or possibly even a token rather than an official issue. The metal doesn’t seem obviously copper — I initially thought it might be silver, but I’m not certain. I’ve attached photos of both sides. Unfortunately, the detail is quite faint, but I’d really appreciate any thoughts on: What type of coin this might be Whether it looks medieval (and if so, what period) Or if it could be something else entirely (token, foreign, etc.) Thanks in advance for any help!

Very interesting—thanks a lot for the reply and the link, Jerry. I’ve had a read and I’m going to follow up on a few new leads. I’ll update when I find out more

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!

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

The coin was purchased prior to posting here.. To save you being party to any of it il refrain from posting questions about my coins here.

Probably a lack of trust in the honesty of the US enhanced by the unpredictable policies of the Trump administration coupled with a $30 odd trillion debt that's still increasing. without limit as numbers on a computer. The poo will hit the fan when someone asks for their money as I doubt if this money exists as your comment regarding the amount of gold to support a gold standard suggests. As for gold it depends what value you put on it. when Nixon broke the link between the $ US and gold was at $ US 41/oz. in August 1971 now $US 471/oz One advantage of gold is you cannot make any more like paper promises on a computer. Many countries are increasing their gold reserves at the expense of the $ US. You are right about China wanting to replace the $ US with the Yuan with the Petrodollar system starting to breakdown along with a policy of isolation are symptoms of the decline of the US as the number one power and will be accelerated when and if China takes over Taiwan and the US loses control of the Pacific Ocean. Not a situation I relish but the signs are there.

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:

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.)

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!!

Ah, the Villy Hall, imagifole, chittery-chattery and sip tilty-elbow from fine chiney tea-cuppers. deep joy