1949threepence

I didn't know there were any

In fully agreeing with the points made by Peckris & Vicky Silver, I would also point out that such differences in thickness also occur in other denominations. For example, if you take a number of 1992 10p pieces, and look at their respective widths, you will almost certainly see some manifestly thinner than others. Width disparity doesn't necessarily imply a fake coin.

Will try and post a few images in here when I get time, but I have: 1918KN GVF with some remnants of mint lustre. Toning is heading towards mid-dark brown and not at all KN like. Quite well-struck but a bit 'fluffy'. Good portrait. Heavily ghosted. 1918H GVF+. No lustre, but a mid-brown colour (without the KN red). Extremely well struck, no ghosting. It may be that it takes some years of circulation for the fully toned colour to appear. Against this however, I also have: 1919H fairly dismal condition - if anybody has my book, you can see it on p20 (plug over!). This can best be described as a kind of dull brown, the colour of well matured cow muck. In my recollection, this was a fairly common tone for 19Hs but not 18Hs which were almost invariably a very dark brown, almost black. The same applied to 12Hs. I think that what we will find is that, apart perhaps from KNs, there is no consistency across the board. I also think that on the evidence produced so far in this thread (thanks guys!), Heaton's used the same blanks as the RM, whilst King's Norton supplied their own and perhaps topped up the Royal Mint's supplies when these became low. Would be very interesting if Dave could dig out the Coin Monthly article. Seen it ~ typical of a coin of that age with about 50 years heavy circulation behind it. Excellent book, by the way. If there is any justice, it will become a definitive work. A bible for coin grading.

That would be superb, and much appreciated. Magnificent, and at £725, a mere snip here is the page it's on Needless to say, I can't afford it !!

All interesting stuff. I think dies were used to death virtually everywhere in the period 1915-20 and the quality of the end product can be dreadful, and you may be right that the two private mints tried to eke every bit of use out of their dies, just to make that tiny bit of extra profit. I also have a theory though that the alloys scarcely differed throughout the entire period of production (apart from those notified by the mint), and it is the source of the copper and possibly where it was smelted that creates the different colour - i.e. the level and chemical composition of impurities and the proportion of these removed during smelting. It's all a bit complicated but I might post a thread about it one day. King's Norton clearly used a very consistent source of supply, possibly with some ferrous contamination in the copper. "Not a lot of people know this" ... but, have you noticed there are sometimes ordinary pennies from 1912 to 1919 with the same reddish/brown colour as the KN pennies? Apparently, Kings Norton supplied blanks to the Mint throughout that period. So I treasure my 1912KN penny ! My 1912 penny is GVF and reddish. I had noticed the different colouring, and often wondered what the precise chemical composition of the metals were. It would be a tantalising bit of research to find out what went were, and who used what. Although I suspect well nigh impossible to get meaningful information after nearly a century.

Some absolutely fascinating posts in this thread, guys, giving a real insight into the pennies of the George V era, and their state at the close of the 1960's. I wonder if there are in fact any 1918/1919 H or KN in uncirculated state anywhere. Has anybody ever seen one ?

I started collecting coins when I was 12, and I'm now 31. I'm not sure age is a relevant factor. Collecting anything is a product of a certain mindset, which may well linger for life. The age range is from very young to very old, and any generational effect for a given type of collection, is at best extremely marginal.

Oops, it would help to have the link! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...bayphotohosting (I got interrupted, and so missed the absurdly short time we are allowed to edit our posts ) Very much a coin for the specialist collector, it eventually went for £1200.

Book price for UNC is £40. Whilst that may be a little low, a value of £200, even for a BU example sounds overpriced. Could you upload a pic ?

Yes, possibly. Maybe an object lesson on how easy it is to be taken in by a forgery, due to over enthusiasm. Not that I would have bid for it anyway. I must admit on closer inspection, it doesn't look right, although you couldn't definitively say it's a fake. I hadn't seen your post in the e bay thread. There's something a bit strange about the lion's mane, compared to other coins of the same ilk. It looks slightly too detailed. I don't think there is anything wrong with the underlying basic coin, it's just the vertical mark to the left of the 5 and the slight misplacement that raise suspicions. It's probably a 1903 or 1904 with the number changed, most likely the latter given the angle of the gouge. Attached is a picture of one acquired on ebay a few years ago, or at least I was going to but the page refused to load fully so that I could add one. I wonder if the seller is aware.

Yes, possibly. Maybe an object lesson on how easy it is to be taken in by a forgery, due to over enthusiasm. Not that I would have bid for it anyway. I must admit on closer inspection, it doesn't look right, although you couldn't definitively say it's a fake. I hadn't seen your post in the e bay thread. There's something a bit strange about the lion's mane, compared to other coins of the same ilk. It looks slightly too detailed.

Yes, possibly. Maybe an object lesson on how easy it is to be taken in by a forgery, due to over enthusiasm. Not that I would have bid for it anyway. I must admit on closer inspection, it doesn't look right, although you couldn't definitively say it's a fake. I hadn't seen your post in the e bay thread.

I appreciate that this is slightly off topic, but it really isn't worth starting a new thread for. Has anybody seen this 1905 shilling on e bay at the mo ? It's got to be an EF, something you hardly ever see in this rarity, and will fetch quite a bit, I think (book price is £600 for an EF 1905, but I bet it goes for more). Just a bit of a dirty mark around the obverse lettering, otherwise pretty much perfecto. I'll willingly eat humble pie if it doesn't

Indeed - the secondary market for these items shows just how poor an "investment" they are. There's a glut of commems and the like (or there was, a few years back - I'm sure things haven't changed much?) - and the values in Spink are stagnant. And to make matters worse, the Elizabeth II pages in the Standard Catalogue have become quite ridiculous. I think they should confine them to currency issues only, including proof sets and BU sets, and move everything else out into a separate "Mint Issues & Commemoratives" booklet. Anything not issued for currency could go in there - from the 1972 Silver Wedding "Crown" onwards, i.e. all piedforts, all crown-sized pieces, all gold and silver Britannias, anything issued as a specimen in a folder, Baby Sets, you name it. And also it could then take in all those lovely fantasy pieces too, which don't get featured anywhere, such as the gorgeous pattern 1798 penny, with the Kuchler obverse and reworked Boulton reverse pattern. Totally agree. They really are pandering to the collector market in a way which is making the whole thing annoyingly artificial. One of the reasons I'm just not interested in post 1971 currency at all.

They didn't have enough ways already ? 27.3 mm - that's the new smaller dimension, right? Which means there are some older types, e.g. the 1973 EEC reverse, which will be effectively new designs. ...and as these will all be dated 2009 (as far as I can see), they'll be new designs anyway - especially with the obverse portrait not being the Machin version... Did you notice though that the gold piedfort coin had two obverse options, as follows:- All the others had just option (a) for the obverse design. Thanks for the link, by the way. Very Interesting.

I get the countdown clock sometimes, but other times it doesn't appear Not sure how I get it to appear all the time. and that buy it now has been around since at least May, suggesting that it's overpriced.

That's where the radio controlled clock comes in handy. I've found that if you make your bid on the 2nd button, with 12 seconds to go, you'll usually get in with just 3 or 4 seconds left, depending on how fast your browser is. I didn't bid on this coin in the end, though. Was going to, but getting too close to the end of the month. Payday is not until Friday Sorry you weren't successful, Peckris.

The giveaway is the obverse legend and rim (I agree if it was 'in hand' I could tell in an instant). The rim is quite high, but the clincher is the distance from the legend to the rim. On Type 2's it is always further away - the Type 1 legend is about 1/3 to 1/2 as close. That's worrying about morgan9red. I just bought a BU florin which the photo suggests really is - I hope I don't have to send it back as it cost me not far from book price. You're definitely right. I've just compared, side by side, my 1920 & 1921 shillings, and the legend in the 1920 is palpably closer to the rim, than my (type 2) 1921. You can see the difference if you compare the two links above (the one you posted and the one I posted)

Actually, yes I did note that '1' was a bit strange looking. No, what I was referring to, is it's the rare Type 1 obverse (1911-1920). I've examined as close as I can and I'm 99% sure it is. Which makes it RARE indeed, especially in that grade. You may be right. Might be worth having a punt on.

Since the average browser wouldn't know a radio controlled clock if it bit it in the Refresh button, I'm thinking that wouldn't make much difference ! But ... this shilling is already over £50. Anyone spotted something else about it? (Someone out there certainly has). It may be an optical illusion, or I may be getting tired and past my bedtime, but there does appear to be something different about the "1" the 21 bit of 1921. Bit short, thicker & stubbier. Compare and contrast with this one which is like the one I possess.

I agree it's not UNC, probably GEF. I note there has already been some slight flattening of the lion's nose, which is a sure fire giveaway on all shillings of that era. I actually did manage to obtain a true UNC 1921 shilling off e bay. But it is dirty in places, with a bit of a stain on the obverse just below the King's head. Got it for £39.71 in a late winning bid. Anybody else ever sat there with a radio controlled clock, trying to time to the last few seconds, a late bid at a ridiculously un-outbiddable high price, to avoid being outdone by Hammersnipe ?

Interesting. I actually received an almost BU 1975 2p in my change yesterday. I always wonder where the heck they've been over the years.

I suspect though, that the pennies have been well and truly scanned by now and anything remotely valuable has long been whisked away. Indeed, those halcyon days are long gone, and alas, I was never a part of them

.........Not to mention scanning the lines of coins paraded in those "penny falls" machines in amusement halls, to see if there were any there worth trying to coax out (sad but extremely enthusiastic git that I am) On a saturday morning I would take my £1 2/6 paper round money and go into the Lloyds bank next to the paper shop and get £1 bags of 1d 1/2d etc until I could not make up the £1 any more Did you ever find any that were worth keeping, Gary ? (and have you still got any of them)

I'll post the response on here (1 - 3 working days, they say) Still waiting for a reply ~ so much for the 1 - 3 working days