1964 Six Pence & Half Crown decentration

[ChKy 61]

Dear all!

I received two coins today showing clearly some decentration. What I am wondering about is the rim being flat instead of showing riffle. I checked the coins weight, that seems ok.

Usually the rim is prepared first and the obverse & reverse design than stroke onto the coins surface afterwards, isn´t? Do you have any information about that pieces? Is there any literature published about that topic?

Thanks for notice and your help

[Coinery 1,161]

What I find especially odd about these two coins is how the obverses of both coins seem to be, as near as damn it, complete. I would have expected to find at least a small crescent of the obverse missing, strange????

[ChKy 61]

Especially the Six Pence piece shows some degree of bending. By looking onto the coin I have the intention that it might be a little thinner than usual as well.

That is the reason why I am asking about the coining process. It looks to me that some kind of collar was missing during the process.

[Gary D 76]

Especially the Six Pence piece shows some degree of bending. By looking onto the coin I have the intention that it might be a little thinner than usual as well.

That is the reason why I am asking about the coining process. It looks to me that some kind of collar was missing during the process.

Both coins look to be struck without a collar. Not as uncommon as you would expect

[ChKy 61]

Thanks for your remark. I do not know how common they are, do you have any hind how often that occurs (1:1,000; 1:10,000; 1:100,000)? I do not expect any bargains besides the documentation of the coinage process.

[Chris Perkins 228]

When these things turn up they are more often from the 60s that any other period. I reckon some of the mint workers got bored and played about a bit, especially in the late 60s when they realised they were off to a Welsh field.

[Peter 615]

When these things turn up they are more often from the 60s that any other period. I reckon some of the mint workers got bored and played about a bit, especially in the late 60s when they realised they were off to a Welsh field.

Agree,they moved in 67 I believe.

There are collectors of errors (mainly in the US)where double dies even command high premiums.We have an error member on the forum(not a regular visitor but has some stunning early copper errors)Maybe someone can remember his name.

[ChKy 61]

That is really interesting!

Here in Gemany there is a mint (we have five remaining mints still) which is famous for it´s mint errors & mules. Most well known is the 50 Pfennig 1950 with mint mark "G" showing the obselete circumscription Bank Deutscher Länder instead of Bundesrepublik Deutschland.

And still in the times of Euro they produced certain curiosities.

[Peckris 579]

When these things turn up they are more often from the 60s that any other period. I reckon some of the mint workers got bored and played about a bit, especially in the late 60s when they realised they were off to a Welsh field.

Agree,they moved in 67 I believe.

There are collectors of errors (mainly in the US)where double dies even command high premiums.We have an error member on the forum(not a regular visitor but has some stunning early copper errors)Maybe someone can remember his name.

No, they didn't move at all. The new Mint in Llantrisant only produced decimal coins. The London Mint produced all of the remaining predecimal coins dated 1967 (up to 1969? 1970?) at which point they began to turn their attention to proof sets I believe, and coins for other territories, until their disabanding in ?1975?

In any case, these are 1964, two years even before the Chancellor's announcement to Parliament in 1966 that all predecimal coins would henceforth carry the date 1967 to 'prevent hoarding and speculation' (ha! may the sainted Jim rearrange the following to form a well-known phrase or saying "good bolted it's horse shutting after no door stable the the has").

The interesting part about all this is how on earth this happened. The halfcrown obverse not 'missing a crescent' is well explained by the rim which is completely missing and which is quite wide on Lizzie halfcrowns. However, the sixpence obverse is far more mysterious. The teeth (such as survive) are totally wrong, and so is the gap between the legend and where the teeth should be. For comparative purposes have a look at this 1964 sixpence obverse. The teeth should be almost beads very close to the legend, and the rim too is quite wide. Now check the original picture and note how very different that obverse appears to be. There's more going on here than meets the eye, but what?

[ChKy 61]

No, they didn't move at all. The new Mint in Llantrisant only produced decimal coins. The London Mint produced all of the remaining predecimal coins dated 1967 (up to 1969? 1970?) at which point they began to turn their attention to proof sets I believe, and coins for other territories, until their disabanding in ?1975?

In any case, these are 1964, two years even before the Chancellor's announcement to Parliament in 1966 that all predecimal coins would henceforth carry the date 1967 to 'prevent hoarding and speculation' (ha! may the sainted Jim rearrange the following to form a well-known phrase or saying "good bolted it's horse shutting after no door stable the the has").

The interesting part about all this is how on earth this happened. The halfcrown obverse not 'missing a crescent' is well explained by the rim which is completely missing and which is quite wide on Lizzie halfcrowns. However, the sixpence obverse is far more mysterious. The teeth (such as survive) are totally wrong, and so is the gap between the legend and where the teeth should be. For comparative purposes have a look at this 1964 sixpence obverse. The teeth should be almost beads very close to the legend, and the rim too is quite wide. Now check the original picture and note how very different that obverse appears to be. There's more going on here than meets the eye, but what?

I would guess following: Under high pressure the metal behaves like a fluid. During the time where the dies struck the blank, the material flew in direction ob the (in that case) absent collar. Instead of having beads you get teeth. And because the material was in movement the legend has a bigger distance to the rim than usual.

Quite difficult to explain in a (at least for me) foreign language

[Peckris 579]

I would guess following: Under high pressure the metal behaves like a fluid. During the time where the dies struck the blank, the material flew in direction ob the (in that case) absent collar. Instead of having beads you get teeth. And because the material was in movement the legend has a bigger distance to the rim than usual.

Quite difficult to explain in a (at least for me) foreign language

The weird thing is, from the legend into the centre, it all looks perfect and undistorted - even though the whole design is off-centre.

[ChKy 61]

The distorted part of the design is bend by the die clash. Looking at the reverse the material comes towards the beholder. Hope that my description makes it clear a bit. Difficult to show by using a scanner...

[Peckris 579]

The distorted part of the design is bend by the die clash. Looking at the reverse the material comes towards the beholder. Hope that my description makes it clear a bit. Difficult to show by using a scanner...

Convex one side, and concave the other?

[ChKy 61]

Correct!