Pennies that are more difficult than they should be

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Morning Men,

I have two holes in my GV collection that, on the face of it, ought to have been easy to find in BU, but have escaped me this past 2 years.

I thought I'd ask as many of you are dealers, does anyone have a true BU 1920 or 1928 ?

And by BU I mean entirely problem free with at least 85% remaining lustre....

[Red Riley 2]

Morning Men,

I have two holes in my GV collection that, on the face of it, ought to have been easy to find in BU, but have escaped me this past 2 years.

I thought I'd ask as many of you are dealers, does anyone have a true BU 1920 or 1928 ?

And by BU I mean entirely problem free with at least 85% remaining lustre....

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

Noted Sir, although I had spotted it.

Do we know why the 1917 seems to stand alone among a generally wretched series from 1915-20 as being well struck ?

[Red Riley 2]

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

Noted Sir, although I had spotted it.

Do we know why the 1917 seems to stand alone among a generally wretched series from 1915-20 as being well struck ?

Interesting observation. The 1917 I've got is definitely better struck than the others with the exception of a really good '18H. As to the reason for this, I haven't a clue and it defies all logic. Perhaps a new master die was cut in that year which rapidly wore out due to the unprecedented demand for pennies? As I said, I'm guessing though...

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

Noted Sir, although I had spotted it.

Do we know why the 1917 seems to stand alone among a generally wretched series from 1915-20 as being well struck ?

Interesting observation. The 1917 I've got is definitely better struck than the others with the exception of a really good '18H. As to the reason for this, I haven't a clue and it defies all logic. Perhaps a new master die was cut in that year which rapidly wore out due to the unprecedented demand for pennies? As I said, I'm guessing though...

There are plentiful BU 1917's, well struck to be had, it's odd isn't it. As I've said before, I do wonder exactly how many original collectors we owe our supplies to today. Maybe it isn't anything to do with the striking, maybe it's to do with who was around and interested at the time ?

Such a shame that we can never have a definitive answer and must speculate into the sunset.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

Noted Sir, although I had spotted it.

Do we know why the 1917 seems to stand alone among a generally wretched series from 1915-20 as being well struck ?

Interesting observation. The 1917 I've got is definitely better struck than the others with the exception of a really good '18H. As to the reason for this, I haven't a clue and it defies all logic. Perhaps a new master die was cut in that year which rapidly wore out due to the unprecedented demand for pennies? As I said, I'm guessing though...

There are plentiful BU 1917's, well struck to be had, it's odd isn't it. As I've said before, I do wonder exactly how many original collectors we owe our supplies to today. Maybe it isn't anything to do with the striking, maybe it's to do with who was around and interested at the time ?

Such a shame that we can never have a definitive answer and must speculate into the sunset.

Absolutely. We'll never know where that UNC 1917 was hiding all those years. Was it by design, or by accident ?

Maybe in a collector's box, or a long forgotten child's piggy bank. Possibly in an old suit, left to languish, or an army uniform left over from the Great War. Even tucked away in an unopened drawer somewhere.......

.....We'll just never know for sure.....

[Red Riley 2]

Absolutely. We'll never know where that UNC 1917 was hiding all those years. Was it by design, or by accident ?

Maybe in a collector's box, or a long forgotten child's piggy bank. Possibly in an old suit, left to languish, or an army uniform left over from the Great War. Even tucked away in an unopened drawer somewhere.......

.....We'll just never know for sure.....

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me!

OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade.

[Peckris 579]

Absolutely. We'll never know where that UNC 1917 was hiding all those years. Was it by design, or by accident ?

Maybe in a collector's box, or a long forgotten child's piggy bank. Possibly in an old suit, left to languish, or an army uniform left over from the Great War. Even tucked away in an unopened drawer somewhere.......

.....We'll just never know for sure.....

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me!

OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade.

I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

[1949threepence 3,367]

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me!

OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade.

Clearly that's a highly probable explanation for many, and one which I never thought about.

I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

That too, sounds quite plausible, but why 1928 in particular, peck ?

[azda 979]

My 1928 Penny

[Peckris 579]

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me!

OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade.

Clearly that's a highly probable explanation for many, and one which I never thought about.

I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

That too, sounds quite plausible, but why 1928 in particular, peck ?

Oh, what I meant was, after the designs changed. Could have been any year really! But perhaps people liked the old designs and were sorry to see them go?

[1949threepence 3,367]

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me!

OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade.

Clearly that's a highly probable explanation for many, and one which I never thought about.

I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

That too, sounds quite plausible, but why 1928 in particular, peck ?

Oh, what I meant was, after the designs changed. Could have been any year really! But perhaps people liked the old designs and were sorry to see them go?

I see the connection. Thanks.

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

My 1928 Penny

In nice condition, although is that a spot of verdigris near the I of IND ? Is it lustrous ? Lustre is so difficult to assess from photographs I find.

I guess everyone has a different collecting experience, it's just that as I come near to signing of the GV series in AU 85% lustre +, it's interesting to reflect on how easy each coin has been to hunt down compared to the projected rarity figures one encounters in Freeman et al.

OK I haven't turned over every stone in the world looking and I've also been collecting the EVII and old heads in parallel, so there is absolutely nothing scientific about my observations, but here goes:

Leaving varities to one side for now, I expected 1922, 1926 and 1934 to be difficult and so they have proved. 1915 and 1916 were so difficult I compromised on condition, and 1920 and 1928 just haven't seemed to turn up for me, yet.

I'm having a struggle not compromising on condition, must stay strong

[Red Riley 2]

I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

I think this is very plausible. Something new tends to galvanise people into not only putting aside an example of the new design but saving one of the old ones too. Could this be the reason why the easiest bun penny in BU is 1887?

[azda 979]

My 1928 Penny

In nice condition, although is that a spot of verdigris near the I of IND ? Is it lustrous ? Lustre is so difficult to assess from photographs I find.

I guess everyone has a different collecting experience, it's just that as I come near to signing of the GV series in AU 85% lustre +, it's interesting to reflect on how easy each coin has been to hunt down compared to the projected rarity figures one encounters in Freeman et al.

OK I haven't turned over every stone in the world looking and I've also been collecting the EVII and old heads in parallel, so there is absolutely nothing scientific about my observations, but here goes:

Leaving varities to one side for now, I expected 1922, 1926 and 1934 to be difficult and so they have proved. 1915 and 1916 were so difficult I compromised on condition, and 1920 and 1928 just haven't seemed to turn up for me, yet.

I'm having a struggle not compromising on condition, must stay strong

Not quite sure about the verdigris 400 as the coin is in the vaults of the bank. Here is another 1928, hopefully you can see the picture, not BU but a very good looking coin, dealers gallery picture. Could you men check out my last post in coin aquisition of the week and give me your opinions if the coin is the same as i'd bought please, i personally don't think it is

[Red Riley 2]

The last photo you posted came out rather small, so difficult to tell. The telltale is the fingerprint on Britannia's left. Also, and rather unusually, the last photo you posted seems to show heavy ghosting.

[azda 979]

Yes sorry Derek, its from a dealers gallery picture and that was its size unfortunately

[scott 144]

nice pennies, gohsting was never fixed though

[VickySilver 830]

Yes, interesting post. I have found the 1915 & 1916 in well struck unc. with lustre a challenge as well and rather settled with what I have in the pursuit of the rarities. I always like an 1918 or 1919 of any mint well struck with pleasant lustre as well.

[scott 144]

i have a VF 1919 that looks well struck

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

WW1 pennies that are well struck are tough to find, but someone must have them, this is not a new pastime.

Here's my 1917

[scott 144]

my 1919

as you can see wear shows where detail is, full helmit was a probabilty as well as a great head of hair

[Red Riley 2]

my 1919

as you can see wear shows where detail is, full helmit was a probabilty as well as a great head of hair

Quite the worst strike I have seen is a 1918 Royal Mint obverse shown on p.18 of the grading guide (sorry, couldn't resist the plug!). If it didn't have lustre, you could be forgiven for thinking it was no better than 'fine'. Reverses are often poorly struck around Britannia's right shoulder. The mintage in 1913 at 65m was a record but was succesively broken in 1916 (86m), 1917 (107m), 1919 (113m) and 1920 (124m) so sheer weight of numbers probably had something to do with it. 1921 pushed the record up again (129m) but by then there were probably enough Dreadnoughts in the scrapyards to make as many dies as the mint wanted and the products were of a much higher quality.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Michael Gouby's site shows a 1920 which seems to suit the bill and a 1928 which is nearly so. 1920s however are frequently very poorly struck.

Noted Sir, although I had spotted it.

Do we know why the 1917 seems to stand alone among a generally wretched series from 1915-20 as being well struck ?

Interesting observation. The 1917 I've got is definitely better struck than the others with the exception of a really good '18H. As to the reason for this, I haven't a clue and it defies all logic. Perhaps a new master die was cut in that year which rapidly wore out due to the unprecedented demand for pennies? As I said, I'm guessing though...

There are plentiful BU 1917's, well struck to be had, it's odd isn't it. As I've said before, I do wonder exactly how many original collectors we owe our supplies to today. Maybe it isn't anything to do with the striking, maybe it's to do with who was around and interested at the time ?

Such a shame that we can never have a definitive answer and must speculate into the sunset.

Absolutely. We'll never know where that UNC 1917 was hiding all those years. Was it by design, or by accident ?

Maybe in a collector's box, or a long forgotten child's piggy bank. Possibly in an old suit, left to languish, or an army uniform left over from the Great War. Even tucked away in an unopened drawer somewhere.......

.....We'll just never know for sure.....

About 5 years ago I bought a nice group of B UNC bun heads in auction. There were 4 x 1862, 3 x 1873 and 2 x 1881 as well as some 1860 halfpennies and a Beaded Border Farthing. All came from a deceased estate and were found neatly wrapped in newspaper in the old girls drawer!! When, where and why did she get them? Why keep them wrapped in paper?

It just goes to show that they do turn up in funny places

[Peckris 579]

About 5 years ago I bought a nice group of B UNC bun heads in auction. There were 4 x 1862, 3 x 1873 and 2 x 1881 as well as some 1860 halfpennies and a Beaded Border Farthing. All came from a deceased estate and were found neatly wrapped in newspaper in the old girls drawer!! When, where and why did she get them? Why keep them wrapped in paper?

It just goes to show that they do turn up in funny places

Wonder what the price was? The 1873s and 1881s (especially) are very difficult in high grades!