A NEWP for me this time

[Gary D 76]

This little trinket arrived today. The previous owner said that he found it in a junk box in an antique 25 years ago and had shown it to several dealer who maintianed that it was likely a genuine royal mint error. It may or may not be junk. What do you think?

[Hussulo 6]

Nice one Gary. It appears to be struck on a wrong planchet. This could also contribute to some loss in detail as the planchet is thinner.

[Gary D 76]

If I was to guess, which it would be. I'd say Canadian 5c

[Hussulo 6]

If I was to guess, which it would be. I'd say Canadian 5c

Have you weighed it and do you know what a Canadian 5c weighs?

[Gary D 76]

If I was to guess, which it would be. I'd say Canadian 5c

Have you weighed it and do you know what a Canadian 5c weighs?

I hadn't, it's 4.52g. I have no idea of the weight of a 5c but they look about the same size and shape plus being Cupro-Nickel. I assume mine is Cupro-Nickel.

[muygrandeoso 0]

If I was to guess, which it would be. I'd say Canadian 5c

Have you weighed it and do you know what a Canadian 5c weighs?

I hadn't, it's 4.52g. I have no idea of the weight of a 5c but they look about the same size and shape plus being Cupro-Nickel. I assume mine is Cupro-Nickel.

The Canadian 5 cent of 1937 should weigh 4.54 grams, so this coin is in the right range.

[Gary D 76]

I seem to remember a note in Peck about errors and trials. I don't have a copy so cannot check. The vague memory is probably what drew me to the coin. Does anyone have a copy to hand.

[Colin G. 147]

I seem to remember a note in Peck about errors and trials. I don't have a copy so cannot check. The vague memory is probably what drew me to the coin. Does anyone have a copy to hand.

Gary,

Peck does state that "As first struck for trial purposes only they were relatively thin coins, but at the last moment reports came in that they were sometimes able to actuate certain shilling and sixpence slot machines. To obviate this their thickness was increased sufficiently..."

This could be a possibility, but the coin does appear somewhat mistruck, and I have to admit, before I got to the lower posts I thought canadian 5c

Peck does reference a thin flan example but states it as "pure nickel; thin flan" Rarity [Probably Unique]

[Gary D 76]

I seem to remember a note in Peck about errors and trials. I don't have a copy so cannot check. The vague memory is probably what drew me to the coin. Does anyone have a copy to hand.

Gary,

Peck does state that "As first struck for trial purposes only they were relatively thin coins, but at the last moment reports came in that they were sometimes able to actuate certain shilling and sixpence slot machines. To obviate this their thickness was increased sufficiently..."

This could be a possibility, but the coin does appear somewhat mistruck, and I have to admit, before I got to the lower posts I thought canadian 5c

Peck does reference a thin flan example but states it as "pure nickel; thin flan" Rarity [Probably Unique]

Thanks Colin,

Yes, I do remember reading that trials were done on different thicknesses, I believe ranging from 1.5mm to 2.5mm but these where in Edward VIII's time and I assume all in Copper /Zinc as all 3d were.

" Peck does reference a thin flan example but states it as "pure nickel; thin flan" Rarity [Probably Unique]"

Interesting, I like the word 'probably' althought I think the 5c theory more likely. Even so, as the dodecagonal was an experimental shape can I assume that 1937 was the 1st year of issue for the 5c aswell.

[E Dawson 0]

http://www.reade.com/Particle_Briefings/spec_gra2.html

I see nickel, pure and rolled listed at 8.67 specific gravity. A University or chem lab could help in this regard. Is this coin for sale???

[Rob 3,152]

http://www.reade.com/Particle_Briefings/spec_gra2.html

I see nickel, pure and rolled listed at 8.67 specific gravity. A University or chem lab could help in this regard. Is this coin for sale???

If it were pure nickel it would be slightly magnetic. Cupro-nickel isn't magnetic.

[Gary D 76]

http://www.reade.com/Particle_Briefings/spec_gra2.html

I see nickel, pure and rolled listed at 8.67 specific gravity. A University or chem lab could help in this regard. Is this coin for sale???

If it were pure nickel it would be slightly magnetic. Cupro-nickel isn't magnetic.

Sorry Ed not for sale although I'd be very interested in what a realistic value would be though.

Rod, that's a good idea. As an engineer I should have thought of that myself. Anyway finding a magnet is not the easiest things to do, so not to be outdone I used a bit of lateral thinking and found an old loudspeaker in the loft. I applied the coin to the magnet and it nearly broke my fingers as it snatched it from my hand and I had to take a craw hammer too it to knock it off again.

So I guess it's magnetic, where do we go next?

[scottishmoney 29]

But by that time Ottawa was striking all the Canadian coins. My guess would be that it might be another foreign coin, maybe even another colonies.

[Gary D 76]

But by that time Ottawa was striking all the Canadian coins. My guess would be that it might be another foreign coin, maybe even another colonies.

The tooling was still being produced in London at this time though. Also the 5c was pure nickel which looks to match my coin.

[Gary D 76]

But by that time Ottawa was striking all the Canadian coins. My guess would be that it might be another foreign coin, maybe even another colonies.

The tooling was still being produced in London at this time though. Also the 5c was pure nickel which looks to match my coin.

It was seeing the 12 sided 5c that made me think it may have been that flan that was used but on further research the 12 sided 5c didn't appear until 1942 and then in brass, not until 46 in nickel.

There is a striking resemblence though

[Rob 3,152]

So I guess it's magnetic, where do we go next?

Email the mint and give them all the info you have such as weight, the fact that it is magnetic suggests nickel, pictures etc. With a bit of luck you will get a reply from Kevin Clancy in a few weeks. He will ask you to send it in for a positive id, but will probably make a suggestion as to what the flan was intended for based on what was produced at the mint in the relevant period. I did this for a 1967 florin weighing just under 8g which I was informed was on a flan for a 10Fr from Burundi.

[E Dawson 0]

Value hard to determine even though I do this for Krause. I would think given that it is not actually a pattern (likely) but rather an error strike - we assume - that it would have a bit less value but legitimately is probably 250-300 pounds or so. I have quite a few off metal strikes (OMS) myself but mostly patterns of 20th C. and lack an OMS version of the brass 3d.

[Hussulo 6]

even though I do this for Krause.

Do you work for Krause? I'm jealous I would love to work in a coin related job.

[Gary D 76]

Value hard to determine even though I do this for Krause. I would think given that it is not actually a pattern (likely) but rather an error strike - we assume - that it would have a bit less value but legitimately is probably 250-300 pounds or so. I have quite a few off metal strikes (OMS) myself but mostly patterns of 20th C. and lack an OMS version of the brass 3d.

Thanks Rob, I have email the pictures to the royal mint.

The more I look at this the more I'm beginning to think that this coin is in actual fact not a OMS 3d at all. I'm gradually coming around to the idea that it's a trial strike for the 1942 Canadian 5C. The obverse in particular is much more 5c than 3d. Ok it's obvious that 3d dies were used but they would be ideal to modify for a trial strike rather than sink new one's. Although not mentioned by Peck there were two George VI obverses, the early one and a later used from late 1937 to 1952. They can be identified by looking at the pointing of the B in :BR: the early die has the strike of the B pointing to a corner whereas the later has the strike of the B much more to the right of the corner. So we have two dies of no further use, idea for the job.

[E Dawson 0]

Just a contributor, physician by trade.

[Gary D 76]

I received an email stock reply today from Mr Clancy so I have put the coin into the post to him. Hopefully in a few weeks I should hear something.

[E Dawson 0]

The reason this got me to thinking that this was an OMS and as such more likely an error is that even whilst worn the coin does not look as though it was planned as a trial strike (see for example the recent nickel 1951 farthing on Colin Cooke site). Still an interesting coin and would like to know what opinion is rendered so do share.

[Gary D 76]

The reason this got me to thinking that this was an OMS and as such more likely an error is that even whilst worn the coin does not look as though it was planned as a trial strike (see for example the recent nickel 1951 farthing on Colin Cooke site). Still an interesting coin and would like to know what opinion is rendered so do share.

I will post when I hear anything. I had a quick look at the Colin Cooke site but could not find the farthing you mention. As to the wear, reverse looks well worn but the observe although a bit battered is not worn, even on the high point like the ear. Very strange.

[E Dawson 0]

Yes, quite sure Neil sold the farthing, but it was on the cover of their list about 2-3 months ago.

[Gary D 76]

Well, after nearly 7 month the 3d has arrived today special delivery from the Royal Mint with a letter from Kevin Clancy. In his letter he confirms that the coin is infact made of nickel but gives no indication of which flan was likely used. He is of the opinion that it is an OMS made from a blank intended for one of the many overseas coins which were struck at the mint and became mixed in with threepence blanks and was then struck by threepence dies in the usual way, once struck failed to be detected by the inspection procedures and allowed to enter circulation. He suggests that the mint is unable to say how many coins may have been mis-struck and that I should approach a professional coin dealer for a valuation.