Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Peckris 2

Coin Hoarder
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,431

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    162

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Peckris 2

  1. Peckris 2
    Agreed - the portrait looks too big and Britannia too small for a genuine one.
  2. Peckris 2
    I learned the hard way! and haven't kept any definite examples. I don't know if this coin from Google Images HAS been dipped, but often a coin that has been dipped too much will look rather like this: ... and yes, I'm talking about silver. Dip won't work on any other metal (it's why it's called "silver dip"!)
  3. Peckris 2
    Oh dear, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that I bought several of these in a job lot years ago, due to the low mintage figures. The bad news is that they are SOMEWHERE, but god knows where and being disabled it's not going to be either quick or easy to find them. If no-one else swims to the rescue I will try to find them at some point. Or TRY to find them!
  4. Peckris 2
    You can tell from the way the date sits in the top 2/3 of the exergue - in other words there is the space below where the H sat.
  5. Peckris 2
  6. Peckris 2
    Re-use of the die by repunching the worst affected letters / numbers?
  7. Peckris 2
    Interesting - note that the GRA is doubled to the left, whereas the TIA is doubled below. Could a double strike cause that? And what about the portrait - is there any sign of doubling there?
  8. Peckris 2
    K ?
  9. Peckris 2
    Not double struck - I would say the whole date has been repunched. We do know from the sheer number of 1858 varieties that dies were used and re-used, most likely to save costs ahead of a planned conversion to bronze in 1859 (postponed for a year and a half). I have that 'doubled' date but not 1 over 1. The absence of doubling anywhere else I think proves that it was a recut date purely to prolong die use.
  10. Peckris 2
    The date is very scarce and rare indeed in that condition. The porousness will certainly have an effect on value but I don't see why it shouldn't carry a value between VF and EF ? Nice one.
  11. Peckris 2
    Original lustre? That's not possible. It's not a coating after all. Once gone, you can't restore it.
  12. Peckris 2
    I've never quite understood this. Yes, they are COMPARATIVELY scarce, but with mintages of 10m+ and 7m+ they're hardly rare.
  13. Peckris 2
    Yes, that's a roll issued by banks for use by shops etc. RM 'mint bags' were for much larger sums, for example a £5 bag of pennies or halfpennies. The banks would split the mint bags into smaller quantities and roll them up or put into cash tills. In the late 60s mint bags of common coins were issued 'for investment purposes' ... which failed dismally of course! (That eBay seller is incredibly optimistic if they think they'll get £8 apiece for 1983 £1 coins x 20.)
  14. Peckris 2
    IIRC in the 60s the RM mint bags were some kind of cloth or sacking (I only know that from pictures, I never had one!)
  15. Peckris 2
    To answer the question, you'd have to survey as many of that date as you can, and see if there are any other specimens?
  16. Peckris 2
    Sixpence:
  17. Peckris 2
    Ironic that the man who was second only to Henry VIII in defacing beautiful churches, should be so defaced himself.
  18. Peckris 2
    Am I right in thinking he doesn't have to be Charles once king? I'm thinking of his grandad who was Albert ("Bertie") and only became George on accession. Shame really - King Albert would have been a fabulous name. One of Charles' names is Arthur, and wouldn't it be great if we had a King Arthur, albeit one who talks TO plants and OF monstrous carbuncles.
  19. Peckris 2
    Hadn't heard either of those. I quite enjoyed Jane's Addiction, especially the more quiet melodic passages. Can't say I like the Smashing Pumpkins - perhaps I'm too old now for grunk, punge, or whatever term applies to the unholy marriage of punk and grunge.
  20. Peckris 2
    Ah - I understand now. (Your original wording was ambiguous!)
  21. Peckris 2
    The first example is clearly a double strike so I'd discount that. The second is rather faint so I'd not like to say. The third though looks like it could be, especially as there's traces of the down stroke and also something is going on with the loop of the 5 (though that could equally just be damage).
  22. Peckris 2
    I'd be happy to give it EF myself.
  23. Peckris 2
    I'm not so sure. The second stroke of the "3" is too sharply angled towards what would be the top stroke?
  24. Peckris 2
    Careful. We have a very respected forum member who is "Dave G". Suggest you find another name for this one to avoid confusion?
  25. Peckris 2
    Certainly in Britain the 1936 (as usual, following the Abdication) is the most common. 1928 and 1929 are plentiful too, being first two years of essentially the first new reverse since 1902. 1935 I would say next, though not very different from 1931 and 1933 also. 1932 is the third hardest, though quite a bit easier than 1934, and 1930 the hardest. (I'm talking high grades here - none are rare in low grades not even 1930.)
×
×
  • Create New...
Test