1949threepence

That's exactly what I thought, Declan. It's not a fully like for like comparison.

I've always thought that one of the fun things about collecting was shifting through loads of junk to find a bargain coin that satisfyingly fills a gap LOL Glad you've got the time to waste! When you've got an auction house to haul up yet ANOTHER accumulation in a cardboard box, bags full of worthless low denomination crap, you never want to see another believe me But think how you'd feel if just one of those cardboard boxes full of crap had an EF 1926ME, say. Or an EF 1869/1875H/1863 with die number, and somebody else got them because you couldn't be bothered with just that one box too many !!!

Welcome, Uncle Phil, good to see you. Some excellent advice above, but I would say that a great place to start in order to complete a quality collection quickly, is with the 12 sided brass threepenny bit. Four rare dates (1946, 1949, 1950 & 1951), and straddles two monarchs from 1937 to 1967, 30 coins (Yes I know that run of years adds up to 31, but no threepences were minted in 1947). That would really get you into the hobby at no massive expense, from which point you could begin to specialise in a high quality run. Good luck

Not just to do with farthings, but in fact all manner of things, on this this Spink circular I found from last year. Probably most will have already seen it, but in case you haven't there's one or two interesting things in it.

Sorry Dave, no luck this time. Notice it has border teeth rather than dots. This comparison of the shield and trident positions might help you... Helps to know what you're looking for. Although why I didn't look in Freeman, I really don't know. All explained in there.

Need to compare with a verified 1922/27 reverse:- Still not sure. I wish I could merge the two pictures so we could see them side by side. Anybody know how to do this ?

You're right Declan. It's hard to get one in any condition. So well played, Rich

Interesting. The last time I used mediafire was to download the 1972 penny article. A subsequent virus scan revealed the following:- The first infection I've had in many months, save for the ubiquitous spyware cookies. Not saying they are definitely a result of mediafire, but I'll run another scan and see what I get this time. Clear this time, so maybe something else

Interesting. The last time I used mediafire was to download the 1972 penny article. A subsequent virus scan revealed the following:- The first infection I've had in many months, save for the ubiquitous spyware cookies. Not saying they are definitely a result of mediafire, but I'll run another scan and see what I get this time.

Works and the download starts when you click "Click here to start download from MediaFire" on the opening page. Another very interesting article, even though I'm not a farthing collector. Printed off for possible future reference. Thanks AardHawk.

With silver, unless it's a particularly rare date, then grades below fine are best just measured in silver bullion value, IMO.

Not an e bay laugh, but actually a genuine bargain for a starter collector, or one without too much spare cash link here

Here's the e bay link Price has dropped by £1k, I'm sure.

The aircraft was only travelling at about 100 to 120 knots approaching the airfield to land when it struck a farm windbreak in thick fog and crashed on return from its 96th operational sortie. This time to Hamburg and back in April 1945. The coins were found in the 1980s and were all found in the top few inches of soil in a wood. Largely in leaf mould. As can be seen from my previous post the later coins are almost uncirculated. We assume that the dings happened in the crash. So 40 years in the ground in a mostly sheltered environment with just a few pheasant droppings to add to the mix. Regards Kris Thanks for the detail clarification, Kris. The deterioration apparent on the 1920's (and earlier) silver, is undoubtedly down to previous wear, and not to exposure or other reasons.

I saw that coin a few days ago. The vendor asked £3995, and requested an offer. Even without an H I wouldn't pay 4 figures for such a badly worn coin. Can't see any trace of an H, but who knows. I'm not convinced there were ever any London mint pennies that year. There may have been die issues at the Heaton mint, however.

Sometime last year there was a thread posted somewhere on the forum. about a World War II fighter plane which had crashed in 1945, here in England. When the wreckage was sifted through (and I can't for the life of me remember what year that was), change was discovered in the pockets of one of the unfortunate RAF men. It was photographed, and I remember thinking that although it was only 1945, silver from just the 1920's, already appeared well worn for its age. So it is no surprise that very little pre 1930 silver was still in circulation by the 1960's. Even more so for pre 1920 92% silver coinage, especially in combination with the hoarding referred to by Peck.

Glad you said that, as I thought I was being a bit thick and reading Court's article incorrectly. Mine is definitely Freeman 165, reverse C combined with Obverse 2. Fantastic article, which I've printed off.

It would have been worth the relatively low cost just to see whether it was a die number, or just a blob. One of those things you need to see in hand to be reasonably sure.

The time limit came and went, but nobody bit lol !!! Wonder why not? A VIP Churchill crown is worth £10k without the Satin Finish... imagine what that was worth ....and it was from "a pet and smoke free home", apparently....

The obvious problem being that strike variations are not consistent from year to year, and we only tend to notice the really sharp strikes, and those where there is obvious deterioration. Not the bulk of "ordinary" strikes. Moreover, as we all know, there are years in which nearly all the strikes appear to be sub standard, like say 1915/16 pennies, and for that matter, 1907 pennies, where I've yet to see a sharply struck shield, even on an UNC specimen. Die wear is a factor in so much as it is commonly observed informally, and may lend a bit of a premium to some sharply struck coins, but it would surely be an enormously complex and difficult task, to attempt to quantify and categorise it. There is a kind of informal system now, based on three states : • 1. early strikes, really crisp, which (should) command a premium • 2. the majority of 'bog standard' UNC strikes • 3. poor strikes / worn dies which usually go significantly cheaper I'm not sure I'd want to see anything more complex than that. ....and of that informal system, only the first ever has attention drawn to it. Unless it's a totally impartial assessment, of course ..... Hahaha - yes true, though I HAVE seen weak strikes described (usually by a dealer who wants us to know that his Fine-looking coin is actually EF) Ah, the converse situation.....yes, indeed. I should have remembered that. You're right of course

The time limit came and went, but nobody bit lol !!!

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752 You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive! Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule. I think you will find it is the rare mule. Just noticed that it's my coin. Well the Auctiva image seems to show the "I" of BRITT pointing directly at a tooth. That would hopefully make it the rare mule.

The obvious problem being that strike variations are not consistent from year to year, and we only tend to notice the really sharp strikes, and those where there is obvious deterioration. Not the bulk of "ordinary" strikes. Moreover, as we all know, there are years in which nearly all the strikes appear to be sub standard, like say 1915/16 pennies, and for that matter, 1907 pennies, where I've yet to see a sharply struck shield, even on an UNC specimen. Die wear is a factor in so much as it is commonly observed informally, and may lend a bit of a premium to some sharply struck coins, but it would surely be an enormously complex and difficult task, to attempt to quantify and categorise it. There is a kind of informal system now, based on three states : • 1. early strikes, really crisp, which (should) command a premium • 2. the majority of 'bog standard' UNC strikes • 3. poor strikes / worn dies which usually go significantly cheaper I'm not sure I'd want to see anything more complex than that. ....and of that informal system, only the first ever has attention drawn to it. Unless it's a totally impartial assessment, of course .....

The obvious problem being that strike variations are not consistent from year to year, and we only tend to notice the really sharp strikes, and those where there is obvious deterioration. Not the bulk of "ordinary" strikes. Moreover, as we all know, there are years in which nearly all the strikes appear to be sub standard, like say 1915/16 pennies, and for that matter, 1907 pennies, where I've yet to see a sharply struck shield, even on an UNC specimen. Die wear is a factor in so much as it is commonly observed informally, and may lend a bit of a premium to some sharply struck coins, but it would surely be an enormously complex and difficult task, to attempt to quantify and categorise it.

Very minor issues. In the hand I've no doubt it looks nigh on perfect.