Churchill Crown welded to Motorbike!

[Chris Perkins 228]

These are the pictures of the Churchill Crown welded into a hole on a large and very attractive Triumph motorcycle.

The owner wanted something British that would go well with the British Bike. It had to be common and it had to be cheap. Hmmm I noticed he used the Queen side in the end!

[Chris Perkins 228]

And the whole Bike:

[Half Penny Jon 0]

Excellent, I muct add that to my long list of uses for churchill crowns!

Chris,

Can you please tell me if this edge is recorded or not:

My Webpage

Many thanks,

Penny Master (West Ham rule)

[Master Jmd 81]

i was wondering when we would see it...looks nice

[william 0]

From looking that up I think it just might me an unrecorded edge!

Love that motorbike Chris!

Edited April 26, 2004 by william

[Emperor Oli 0]

The guy seems to know ewhat he's talking about plus it isn't recorded in any of my books. It's far too much for a George VI crown though imho!

[william 0]

No wonder it doesn't have any bids!

[Emperor Oli 0]

I'm not saying it's a bad coin, as implied by your post, I'm simply saying I could think of a better way to spend £300+!

[Master Jmd 81]

No wonder it doesn't have any bids!

well, would you bid for it at £350.00; NO!!!

Edited April 26, 2004 by Master J.M.D

[Emperor Oli 0]

As it's a rare error, of course £350 is right.

[Master Jmd 81]

As it's a rare error, of course £350 is right.

i certainly would not pay £350.00 for it, this is mostly because of its age; its only 53 years old, if it was about 100 years old then maybe!

[Emperor Oli 0]

It doesn't matter about age, it matters about rarity. This is an unrecorded, possibly unique coin. as such it is worth the money set by the seller

[Half Penny Jon 0]

I agree with Oli, I could definately think of a better way to spend that much money! However, in the future, it will no doubt become more desirable.

[Chris Perkins 228]

The 1951 Crown is not recorded in English Silver Coinage. Mainly because it is clearly an error and not a variety.

I have had dealing with Lloyd Roberts, he's definitely straight, but I too think that's an awful lot of money for a coin that had a collar slip or suchlike, especially as the usual ones are under £10.00

Master J.M.D, try to move into the level of 'coin conciousness' where age is absolutely irrelevant and condition/rarity dictate everything. You can do it, the force is strong with you.

[Emperor Oli 0]

I was going to put that about how rarity means more but I didn't think people would understand - you've encapsulated it perfectly! People say "Oooh I have a 1967 Halfpenny, it must be worth a fortune cause it's 40yrs old!" Old doesn't mean valuable!

[Master Jmd 81]

Master J.M.D, try to move into the level of 'coin conciousness' where age is absolutely irrelevant and condition/rarity dictate everything. You can do it, the force is strong with you   

i was only stating that i think a 190_ unrecorded crown reading would be nicer to own then a 1953 one

[Chris Perkins 228]

Yes it would, then you should have said that.

And it probably would only be more sought after because it would be even more difficult to find another 1900 error Crown, and it is regarded as a rarer more pleasant coin in the first place.

[Master Jmd 81]

As it's a rare error, of course £350 is right.

maybe not so rare ...here...

[Emperor Oli 0]

That's a different edge inscription though

[Sylvester 15]

But supposing you collected crowns by date/type and minor varities including errors, it might be of more interest to you then.

It's like saying why does anyone collect mule obverse reverse bun head pennies...