terrysoldpennies

Freeman 3+d

It certainly was not a 1911 obverse as it has the small head portrait found on 1928 to 1936 coins . Terry

No . the bidding was ended early by the seller. Terry

I was following that one Ian . Sweet talking early bidder, off line ?, or maybe the seller was informed just exactly what it was he was selling. Terry

Welcome Dave , Its a Freeman 3+d F13 one of the common types. Terry

Here's another. Rotated I in VICTORIA 1862 Terry

No , only the 1958 broad rim coins. Pic below shows the 1957 and 59 along side the 1958s

Hi Geoff. We have discussed this before on the forum . look in search = [1958 half penny variations] 23rd Jun 2016. all of the broad rim coins I have found all have longer teeth, and if I my add, that I have found a total of four differing types, so yours being a broad rim short tooth type would make it five types . The other consideration is , are you certain your coin is the widest rim type . I trust that makes it as clear as mud. See the post and compare yours with them. Terry

Well Richard I can't find any of these open Ps among my 1861 to 74 coins, it does seem to show that there are an enormous number of variations made to a more or less similar design during the first three years of the bronze coin production. I guess many more are still out there to be discovered . Terry

P.s I have only ever found the P to Tooth Rev. Gs on 1861 coins , none of the subsequent years to 1874, but then you out there may prove me to be wrong. Terry

6+g

6+g

4+g

4+g P in Penny to tooth

Yes Richard, with some Obv. 4s ,and they normally also have the 6+1 in the date, closer together than on the normal Rev.Gs, Just found the Obv 6 and the 6+1 are wide apart . Terry

Nice one Mike, I saw that one on line , its the scarcer type which I discovered with the P in PENNY rotated left to point at the tooth. Almost all Rev. Freeman G coins have the P pointing to the gap Terry

Richard , when you look at the biding, I think its two of his friends biding it up. Terry

Thanks Nick , that's what I thought, in my 1953 set all the coins are cameo. Terry

Nick, are the bronze coins in the set Cameo. Terry

I bought this 1953 penny last week , it was described as a Proof, but after some research came to the conclusion that its what the Americans call a Cameo. Well, that's what I consider it to be from all that I have read . After all, it is a Proof, but it has a matt finish to the detail on the coin , but the field is highly polished. Its known and documented that Bright finish and Matt finish coins were made in 1953, but as far as I am aware , not so this two tone type. Richard and I both knew nothing about them, hence this post by him, well is this just a description of the contrast between the different surfaces, or should we always describe this twin type finish on a coin as Cameo. Also as far as I can tell, of all the pre-decimal bronze pennies produced for 110 years this so called Cameo finish was only ever used in 1953. I believe this type was only made for VIP sets, and have no idea as to its rarity. Below are the three types of finish found on a 1953 Penny. If you can tell us more, please let us know. Terry

Hi . Welcome to the forum Martin, The first coin could as you say be a weak strike , but it could also be the result of a worn die , which would result in a loss of detail . The second coin looks to be a die crack, this is uncommon on modern coins, but was very common on early Victorian coins , Improved quality of the dies , resulting from the better types of steel now used in the manufacture of the dies. Terry

I've had a good look at the picture on page 41 in Goubys BP 1861 AA . The LCAs example has the same faint arc to the left of the 8 , which seems to continue through the lower hole at the bottom of the 8 . No sign of this line continuing on the Gouby example. It also differs in that the hole at the top of the 8 is smaller , and the first 1 in the date is slightly rotated anticlockwise . Its possibly the same die, at a different stage in its life , but I think its hard to be certain . I've probably not helped much. Terry

In my opinion it could be either , 8 over 6 or 8 over 8 as such , I wouldn't by it . Terry