DaveG38

That's the one! Have I missed out on a 'bargain', or had a lucky escape? It looked genuine to me, but given that a VF specimen went for £9,500, I felt that anything above £2,000 for this one in Good Fair, maybe NF was as far as I wanted to go. Sometimes filling a gap isn't always a case of 'at any cost' and for me this was one such occasion. Hey ho. I console myself with the thought that this issue wasn't really a circulation piece and that's what I collect, rather than all the other trials, proofs and assorted types. But I've still got the dolly and the pins!!!! I had a good look at it and did not think it was genuine. Looked like tooling on the exergue although I didn't put it under a scope. There was also a lot of grime in and around the date but not on the legends. I understand all of the 9's on these look enlarged but it looked too bad to be a pattern piece. I may be wrong but a £2360 price is a long way to go for a coin you hadn't inspected first hand! If it's any consolation there was no interest in the room with book against phone all the way from £40! Looks like I may have had a lucky escape. I based my assessment of it on the obverse, which definitely seems to be obverse 3 not 4 (as found on the 1694) plus the fact that as you say the '9' on these is a very odd size. I also examined the only other one I have seen and the lettering etc. plus the date numbering seemed to be OK. However, I agree that was not in the hand. I also guess it could have been a forgery, either contemporary or otherwise, although its hard to see where an original would have come from, either then or now.

That's the one! Have I missed out on a 'bargain', or had a lucky escape? It looked genuine to me, but given that a VF specimen went for £9,500, I felt that anything above £2,000 for this one in Good Fair, maybe NF was as far as I wanted to go. Sometimes filling a gap isn't always a case of 'at any cost' and for me this was one such occasion. Hey ho. I console myself with the thought that this issue wasn't really a circulation piece and that's what I collect, rather than all the other trials, proofs and assorted types. But I've still got the dolly and the pins!!!!

The only other price I can give you is from the 'Concise Catalogue of English Coins' by Seaby in 1965. The only grade quoted is VF and the price is £95.

1997 F £350 VF £450 EF £550 UNC £750 Proof £2400 2004 F £400 VF £550 EF £675 UNC £900 Proof £2500 2011 F £900 VF £1200 EF £1600 UNC £2000 Proof £3750 Prices are for the standard proofs not the varieties.

hi there nice to know theres someone else in aberdeen on here, i actually found out on weds that the stamp shop had coins so i bought some got a good deal as well he told me if he gets any coins now he puts them in the window if there any good so keep an eye there cause he does still have, thanks allot mate if you use facebook or something like that you should send me a way so we could talk . thanks wayne I used to think a junk shop (or non-coin specialist) was a great place for coin bargains. That was until I found a small time antiques shop in the Midlands where I bought a few coins at marginally below book price. He also happened to have a VG 1924 florin he was asking £25 for. I told him it was way overpriced and he gave me a sour look. I went back there a few years later and it was still there, unsold, but now reduced to £20. Still can be but you have to be lucky. My 1893 Jubilee Head sixpence in near fine condition came from a junk shop bowl in Hastings a few years ago, for the princely sum of 50p. Ditto a 1905 florin and 1695 sixpence from a Whitstable junk shop for a couple of pounds each. I also picked up a 1671 Crown with the quarto edge for £30 from a general antiques dealer, so it can be done, albeit you usually wade through piles of rubbish before you find a nugget. But isn't that the fun? Certainly for a collector, but maybe not a dealer? I'm quite sure that there's a 1927 reverse 1922 penny somewhere out there in a bowl with my name on it - its just a case of getting out there. Um... er... no! Speaking personally. (Having dealt a bit and weighed through cardboard boxes of auction lots all containing vast accumulations of cupro-nickel, brass 3ds, and 20th Century bronze, you develop a kind of fatigue that never leaves ) Sorry, the fun is in finding the nugget not the wading through all of the cr*p! Although as a collector and not a dealer, I still enjoy going through pots and buckets at boot fairs etc. One day, I'll find the rarer 1965 sixepnce - got a 1964, but there's a boot fair pot with one for me somewhere.

hi there nice to know theres someone else in aberdeen on here, i actually found out on weds that the stamp shop had coins so i bought some got a good deal as well he told me if he gets any coins now he puts them in the window if there any good so keep an eye there cause he does still have, thanks allot mate if you use facebook or something like that you should send me a way so we could talk . thanks wayne I used to think a junk shop (or non-coin specialist) was a great place for coin bargains. That was until I found a small time antiques shop in the Midlands where I bought a few coins at marginally below book price. He also happened to have a VG 1924 florin he was asking £25 for. I told him it was way overpriced and he gave me a sour look. I went back there a few years later and it was still there, unsold, but now reduced to £20. Still can be but you have to be lucky. My 1893 Jubilee Head sixpence in near fine condition came from a junk shop bowl in Hastings a few years ago, for the princely sum of 50p. Ditto a 1905 florin and 1695 sixpence from a Whitstable junk shop for a couple of pounds each. I also picked up a 1671 Crown with the quarto edge for £30 from a general antiques dealer, so it can be done, albeit you usually wade through piles of rubbish before you find a nugget. But isn't that the fun? Certainly for a collector, but maybe not a dealer? I'm quite sure that there's a 1927 reverse 1922 penny somewhere out there in a bowl with my name on it - its just a case of getting out there.

Azda, Its obvious that UNC+ means UNC plus a hole. Come on pay attention!!!!!

Declan, In my experience, these dates and denominations are so common, that you are unlikely to see their varieties identified and advertised by the average dealer. The more knowledgeable may do so, but for most there is probably little incentive to go through their stocks to see if a rare variety is lurking. As far as eBay goes, again I doubt that many sellers are aware of the varieties, so there is always the possibility that one will pop up - having said this, it seems likely if they do that forum members will pick them up quickly. So from my point of view, the best options are either rooting about in boot/antique fair pots of run of the mill coins, or boxes of similar material in general auctions. If you are lucky this will reward you with specimens albeit probably not in top condition.

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage? Could it be on a similar penny planchet but for another country? Is it a forgery made of another metal? (As if anyone would forge a 1967 penny ) Does it have anything wrong with the edge? It looks and feels exactly like any 1967 penny (definitely the right planchet, metal, etc). And you're quite right - who'd forge one of they? You'd only notice something wrong if you dropped it on a surface - instead of ringing, it clacks. The only I've not done is weigh it, but I don't have a set of they sensitive coin weigh thingies. Sounds top me as though the metal in the planchet is delaminating i.e. splitting internally along the flan.

As far as I can judge, you are quite correct. That sad and sorry specimen is indeed the Gouby X or hollow neck type. In that condition for wear, worth £30 -£40 based on recent sales. As it is, well £0.99 looks about right if you can live with it. looked at that one myself and came to the same conclusion, Gouby X Who's going to be brave enought to ask him a question..... like do you know you have just ruined a rare coin that would have been worth £30-40. Still recon my shilling is the best though I can never get over what some people do to coins. In my early restarted collecting days (1995), I was ferreting through a tin of old coins in a local antique dealers only to find to my delight a pratically uncirculated cartwheel tuppence. No edge knocks, no problems, except some idiot had drilled a fuc*ing great hole right through it - aaaaagh!!!

To me, but I stand to be corrected by the experts, it looks like the date has been mechanically erased. The lustre in the exergue just doesn't look right, nor does the texture of the metal.

As far as I can judge, you are quite correct. That sad and sorry specimen is indeed the Gouby X or hollow neck type. In that condition for wear, worth £30 -£40 based on recent sales. As it is, well £0.99 looks about right if you can live with it.

Declan, I'm very flattered by the discussions about my two books and you all comparing them in the same space as Freeman and Davies!! My personal view is that any newcomer or general date collector would be well advised to go for Davies and/or Freeman as they cover a wider field than mine. For anybody particularly interested in varieties and the 20th C specifically then clearly my books would be very helpful. I wrote them primarily because I was confused about all the different identifiers that seemed to be used in different sources, so I brought them all together in one place, as well as establishing some new ones. However, the aim was always to cover 20th C as this was where all my confusion came in. When it comes to 19th C the impression I get is that the identifiers are mostly singletons for a particular date/denomination e.g. the RRITANNIA sixpence of 1878 and these are quite well defined in the standard works. Also, of course Michael Gouby has covered the penny series pretty comprehensively in his book. However, I have toyed with the idea of 'doing' the earlier centuries. I'm just not sure that I have the patience to do it all over again, as well as tracking down all the types - there's a hell of a lot of them!! Then there's listing and photographing all the differences, not just the well known one and I find it a daunting prospect - god knows how Peck kept going!!! This was quite a task for the 20thC but at least the supply of coins was no problem. When it comes to the earlier ones, the number of specimens to either purchase or ask owners to allow me to photograph could become prohibitive. Several possibilities have occurred to me as options, but I haven't done anything with either of them. I have toyed with idea of a short book on Victorian die numbers and also with a book to cover overdates for all denominations of milled coinage, with photos of all the types. Again the problem is gaining access to the various specimens as I really can't afford to buy them all. I did consider and then discount a third book in my series to cover gold varieties of the 20th C. Two or three reasons. Firstly there aren't that many different types, so the book would be rather thin. Secondly, not many people collect gold anyway. Thirdly, I doubt that even fewer people collect varieties of gold. Having said this, I was staggered to find that there are three or four types of 1937 Gold £5 piece - I would like to own one of them, but I doubt if many people would collect each of the varieties. Finally, I did wonder about doing something on all the material not covered in my two books, particulartly looking at die cracks, and other faults, mainly for the bronze series. Any thoughts from the forum on what might be worthwhile? For anybody who hasn't spotted it, I meant DRITANNIAR not RRITANNIAR for the 1878 sixpence!

Declan, I'm very flattered by the discussions about my two books and you all comparing them in the same space as Freeman and Davies!! My personal view is that any newcomer or general date collector would be well advised to go for Davies and/or Freeman as they cover a wider field than mine. For anybody particularly interested in varieties and the 20th C specifically then clearly my books would be very helpful. I wrote them primarily because I was confused about all the different identifiers that seemed to be used in different sources, so I brought them all together in one place, as well as establishing some new ones. However, the aim was always to cover 20th C as this was where all my confusion came in. When it comes to 19th C the impression I get is that the identifiers are mostly singletons for a particular date/denomination e.g. the RRITANNIA sixpence of 1878 and these are quite well defined in the standard works. Also, of course Michael Gouby has covered the penny series pretty comprehensively in his book. However, I have toyed with the idea of 'doing' the earlier centuries. I'm just not sure that I have the patience to do it all over again, as well as tracking down all the types - there's a hell of a lot of them!! Then there's listing and photographing all the differences, not just the well known one and I find it a daunting prospect - god knows how Peck kept going!!! This was quite a task for the 20thC but at least the supply of coins was no problem. When it comes to the earlier ones, the number of specimens to either purchase or ask owners to allow me to photograph could become prohibitive. Several possibilities have occurred to me as options, but I haven't done anything with either of them. I have toyed with idea of a short book on Victorian die numbers and also with a book to cover overdates for all denominations of milled coinage, with photos of all the types. Again the problem is gaining access to the various specimens as I really can't afford to buy them all. I did consider and then discount a third book in my series to cover gold varieties of the 20th C. Two or three reasons. Firstly there aren't that many different types, so the book would be rather thin. Secondly, not many people collect gold anyway. Thirdly, I doubt that even fewer people collect varieties of gold. Having said this, I was staggered to find that there are three or four types of 1937 Gold £5 piece - I would like to own one of them, but I doubt if many people would collect each of the varieties. Finally, I did wonder about doing something on all the material not covered in my two books, particulartly looking at die cracks, and other faults, mainly for the bronze series. Any thoughts from the forum on what might be worthwhile?

If you do, you better watch out for extraneous fluffy stuff - you never know where its been.

HHenry, Yes it does I'm afraid. WRL = Westair Reproductions Limited.

It's gun money, made from melting down cannons. The date is 1689 not 1669 and its a half crown (30 pence, hence the XXX).

I'm not convinced about this one. Looking carefully at the base of each numeral, I can see a shallow depression across them all, which makes me wonder if this has been skillfully altered. In the ebay picture, there's a very clear light line across the numbers which looks very suspicious.

Gary, Looking at your photos of the five florins, whatever the outcome of the 'pointings' debate, there is no doubt in my mind that the 1923 with obverse 2 has a smaller head than the one with obverse 3. Assuming that both coins on the bottom row of your photo are the same size as they appear to be, then the head on the right is definitely smaller than that on the left - this is the other differentiator that Davies uses. When I compared your mule on the website with a 1920 obverse 2 florin and a 1923 'normal' florin with obverse 3, I again found that the one on your website is the same size as a normal obverse 2 type. My conclusion, based on what I see is that there are two types as defined by Davies. However, there may be another type and it would be useful to try and establish this from all three differentiators for these types.

This is why in my books on bronze and silver varieties, I gave tribute to a small group of people who carried out these reseaches in the early 1970s, describing them as 'heroic.' I can't imagine sifting through such huge numbers of coins in the way these guys did. An even greater feat was the counting of edge nicks on the milled silver in order to show that the Mint were using these as a kind of mint mark. The results were published in the Numismatic Journal in 1968 (I think) and described a wide range of what I would call micro-varieties of 20th century silver. They covered pretty much all dates through the century and all denominations and the results had to have been obtained using an eye glass on each coin!!! Quite likely the sheer scale of the task and complexity of the measurements needed is the reason why there are few known varieties of the later decimal coinage. It's just too big a job to undertake. Or maybe modern methods mean there are few types to find. I've never seen any study of bronze coinage much beyond the early 1980s i.e. when those involved in the CM studies stopped reporting their findings, or died of sheer exhaustion.

So what happened to the one that was, according to the article, nicked from Leeds? Has it turned up since or is it squirrelled away in a collection only to come to light when the owner dies?

Yes - if the 1926-reverse-1927 is EXACTLY the reverse used for 1927, rather than the 1922 ALMOST reverse, that would make sense. You can't get away with mentioning four varieties for 1926 and not telling more! Apart from Spink, I can find no reference to the third variety. And what is the fourth? The low mintage figures for 1926 mean I don't have that many pennies to look through What am I looking for? perhaps Bernie meant 4 dies? Unless, there's a non-ME obverse with a 1927-style reverse but dated 1926? Another experimental die? The two new 1926 varieties are Freeman obverse 4 with reverse D, same dies as for 1927 pennies, the second is Freeman 4 with completely different reverse, similar to reverse C but with much longer border teeth. I have pictures of these coins but when given them was asked not to share them. Placing value on these coins, including the 1922 rarities is almost impossible, so again, £2000-£5000 ??? When the 1863 die 5 in VG sold for £23,000 ?? My enthusiastic bid was £2750, so who knows!!, without two bidders, the coin could have sold for less than £2000. Just to add another dimension to this debate about the 1926 ME penny, I've just acquired a fair/fine specimen, which is slightly different from the normal type and I wonder where this fits into the picture. It's definitely an ME, so obverse 4 but Britannia has a distinctly shorter thumb and longer index finger which ends at least level with the top of the shield flag, so closer to the 1927 type than the earlier reverse. Going by the pictures on Tony Clayton's site, the standard ME has the thumb and finger about the same length and equidistant from the shield. Mine also shows a wider gap between the thumb and shield. The other difference is that the gaps between the teeth on the reverse seem to be wider than on the standrad type, suggesting that there might be fewer teeth or that theyu are thinner. Does anybody know how many teeth there should be on the standard ME reverse?

When was the last decent design on a crown-sized coin? I'm struggling to think of any post-1977. The only one I actually like is the 2008, Elizabeth I commemorative crown. The proof is particularly nice in my humble opinion. Agree pretty much about all the rest. That's the one with Elizabeth the first with 4 arches? Yes, that's right. The uncirculated coin is quite nice, but the frosted proof is a lovely design. Compared to all the other tatt that has been produced over the years, it stands out. Some of the modern stuff is dire. For instance the 2003 Coronation Jubilee coin, which I think is awful.

When was the last decent design on a crown-sized coin? I'm struggling to think of any post-1977. The only one I actually like is the 2008, Elizabeth I commemorative crown. The proof is particularly nice in my humble opinion. Agree pretty much about all the rest.

I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two. Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO. If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing. Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps. In 1926 there had been no pennies issued for 3 years. Then demand must have increased enough to warrant an issue, even though the modified effigy must have been close to readiness. Assuming the normal run of casual collectors who habitually put a BU penny aside, the first run of 1926s must have satisfied that urge. By the time the ME came along (at the end of the year?) would people have readily seen the difference between the two types anyway? By the time they did, the 1927 pennny would have emerged in large quantities so those got put aside instead. I'm really thinking the 1926ME 'slipped beneath the radar' as far as being noticed. I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two. Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO. If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing. Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps. Surely rarity figures are all nonsence now due to decimalisation. I would guess only 10% of pennies exist now and all the so called rarities were stripped for circulatiion beforehand. The playing field is much levelled now a days and H and KNs are as common as 1967 pennies. That's a very good point, though I'd hardly claim parity between H & KNs with 1967!! We're on the same wavelength here Derek. As a schoolboy it took me a year to suss that my first-ever 1926 penny from change, was the ME ! Back in '26, I'm wondering how many people actually noticed, especially considering how few there were anyway? It would be interesting to get some coin magazines/annuals from around that time to see whether or not they are mentioned. The best we are likley to get are the studies of coins undertaken by various heroic numismatists in the early to mid 1970s when surveys of coins in circulation were being carried out and the results reported in Coin Monthly. I've got most of them, so if I find a spare hundred hours, I'll see what was being reported at the time. However, as has I think already been said, they were probably already taken from circulation by then. The best information I’ve seen is from the survey by V. R. Court (Coin Monthly, October 1972, page 42-43) who found 20 M.E. out of a total of 835 1926 pennies, giving an estimated mintage of 107,750 (i.e. about 2.4%). The reason these are so difficult in high grade, may be due to the existence of the M.E. coins not being noted until about 1960 (in Peck’s book). That is, there is no mention in Seaby’s 1949 book on copper coins, which provides coverage of many bun penny varieties. This may have allowed the M.E. pennies to circulate for 35 years or more, before collectors began looking for them. Just my 2 cents, or approximately one pre-decimal penny’s worth. Best Regards, Thanks for this Inforapenny. You've saved me going through my old issues to find the article.