Two varieties of 1939 brass threepence - wide gap legend and narrow ga

[brauereibeck 1]

Just browsing the bay and came across two listings for the 1939 brass threepence, one from AJW coins, the other from the US based Wybrit. The first E of THREE on the reverse of Wybrit's coin (item number: 180951072422) seems to be noticeably further from the rim than on that of AJW's coin (item number: 320958634004). Everybody knows about the wide gap/narrow gap varieties of 1937 brass threepence identified by Peck, so is this also the case for the '39?

[Peckris 579]

Just browsing the bay and came across two listings for the 1939 brass threepence, one from AJW coins, the other from the US based Wybrit. The first E of THREE on the reverse of Wybrit's coin (item number: 180951072422) seems to be noticeably further from the rim than on that of AJW's coin (item number: 320958634004). Everybody knows about the wide gap/narrow gap varieties of 1937 brass threepence identified by Peck, so is this also the case for the '39?

Unfortunately your two pictures are such different sizes, colours, lighting & exposure, and because they are 2 pictures instead of 2-in-1 side by side, cannot be viewed at the same time. I can't form any impression of their respective gaps. If you would equalise the two pictures in Photoshop or similar, then post that, it would be a great help. Thanks.

[azda 979]

I'll Never understand why anyone would slab such a common coin which costs more than the coin is worth.

1937 threepence, UNC spinks suggested price guide £12. This coin is AUNC so not UNC and its £45, really???

Its cost more to slab than its worth

[seuk 85]

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

[brauereibeck 1]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

[Peckris 579]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

[brauereibeck 1]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

You have nicely summed up George VI brass threepence collecting in one paragraph. As for Elizabeth II, just to complete the list, I've added the 1953 type 2 obverse and the standard 1958 which seem to be scarcer in true BU than their mintage numbers would suggest. Perhaps the availability of the 'plastic set' gave a false impression that BU specimens of the '53 were fairly common and hence were not worth hoarding. But of course it was only the type 1 that came with the sets. As for the 1958, these seem to be weirdly scarce in true BU despite a mintage of over 20 million! My only guess is that they were issued in numbers sufficiently high as not to be perceived as worth collecting, only to then fall victim to the big meltdown after decimalisation.

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939, 1948 and 1953 type 2 obv.

Not so easy to find - 1945 and 1958

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

[azda 979]

Really must get my eyes tested

[Peter 615]

All the 1946 & 49's were plucked out of circulation in the 60's I was given loads by my grandfathers.EF+ are rare though.

[Peckris 579]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

You have nicely summed up George VI brass threepence collecting in one paragraph. As for Elizabeth II, just to complete the list, I've added the 1953 type 2 obverse and the standard 1958 which seem to be scarcer in true BU than their mintage numbers would suggest. Perhaps the availability of the 'plastic set' gave a false impression that BU specimens of the '53 were fairly common and hence were not worth hoarding. But of course it was only the type 1 that came with the sets. As for the 1958, these seem to be weirdly scarce in true BU despite a mintage of over 20 million! My only guess is that they were issued in numbers sufficiently high as not to be perceived as worth collecting, only to then fall victim to the big meltdown after decimalisation.

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939, 1948 and 1953 type 2 obv.

Not so easy to find - 1945 and 1958

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

The 1958 3d is one of those weird inexplicable cases - it was actually identified as a scarcity in BU before decimalisation, as was the 1946 halfpenny, and other strange items like the 1957S shilling (the 1957E is really common in UNC) and the 1958E shilling. Not forgetting the 1958 sixpence and who knows how many others too. I guess we may never know why some dates are scarcer than others - it may be a combination of factors, e.g. time of year issued, whether any were held back, demand for certain denominations being greater at some times, a shortage in one denomination causing lower denominations to circulate more, the hoarding of certain dates more than others for different reasons...

One thing's for sure, the great meltdown should have evened out those weird discrepancies more than actually happened - there's a kind of inertia to price guides that is resistant to reality at times.

[Peter 615]

I was after a BU 1958 6d for a long time....got mine for £2. There are some strange pricing lists of coins.

As always know your subject.

I do love a bargain but will always push my price for nicer examples.

[brauereibeck 1]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

You have nicely summed up George VI brass threepence collecting in one paragraph. As for Elizabeth II, just to complete the list, I've added the 1953 type 2 obverse and the standard 1958 which seem to be scarcer in true BU than their mintage numbers would suggest. Perhaps the availability of the 'plastic set' gave a false impression that BU specimens of the '53 were fairly common and hence were not worth hoarding. But of course it was only the type 1 that came with the sets. As for the 1958, these seem to be weirdly scarce in true BU despite a mintage of over 20 million! My only guess is that they were issued in numbers sufficiently high as not to be perceived as worth collecting, only to then fall victim to the big meltdown after decimalisation.

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939, 1948 and 1953 type 2 obv.

Not so easy to find - 1945 and 1958

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

The 1958 3d is one of those weird inexplicable cases - it was actually identified as a scarcity in BU before decimalisation, as was the 1946 halfpenny, and other strange items like the 1957S shilling (the 1957E is really common in UNC) and the 1958E shilling. Not forgetting the 1958 sixpence and who knows how many others too. I guess we may never know why some dates are scarcer than others - it may be a combination of factors, e.g. time of year issued, whether any were held back, demand for certain denominations being greater at some times, a shortage in one denomination causing lower denominations to circulate more, the hoarding of certain dates more than others for different reasons...

One thing's for sure, the great meltdown should have evened out those weird discrepancies more than actually happened - there's a kind of inertia to price guides that is resistant to reality at times.

Interesting that the 1958 3d and the 1958 sixpence were identified as scarce in BU even whilst they were still currency. I really wouldn't have guessed that. If anyone who worked at the Royal Mint between 1957 and 1959 ever comes across this discussion it would be very interesting if they would share their insights into the mystery. I wonder if large quantities of certain coins were shipped out to colonies that then become independent in the late '50s to mid '60s and whether, in some way, this had an effect on subsequent scarcity. I personally have always found it slightly remarkable that collectors resisted the temptation to spend their BU coins. I mean, pre-credit cards if you were out of cash then your nice shiny 1958 threepence that you'd stashed away would suddenly seem like an expendable luxury!

[Accumulator 52]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

You have nicely summed up George VI brass threepence collecting in one paragraph. As for Elizabeth II, just to complete the list, I've added the 1953 type 2 obverse and the standard 1958 which seem to be scarcer in true BU than their mintage numbers would suggest. Perhaps the availability of the 'plastic set' gave a false impression that BU specimens of the '53 were fairly common and hence were not worth hoarding. But of course it was only the type 1 that came with the sets. As for the 1958, these seem to be weirdly scarce in true BU despite a mintage of over 20 million! My only guess is that they were issued in numbers sufficiently high as not to be perceived as worth collecting, only to then fall victim to the big meltdown after decimalisation.

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939, 1948 and 1953 type 2 obv.

Not so easy to find - 1945 and 1958

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

The 1958 3d is one of those weird inexplicable cases - it was actually identified as a scarcity in BU before decimalisation, as was the 1946 halfpenny, and other strange items like the 1957S shilling (the 1957E is really common in UNC) and the 1958E shilling. Not forgetting the 1958 sixpence and who knows how many others too. I guess we may never know why some dates are scarcer than others - it may be a combination of factors, e.g. time of year issued, whether any were held back, demand for certain denominations being greater at some times, a shortage in one denomination causing lower denominations to circulate more, the hoarding of certain dates more than others for different reasons...

One thing's for sure, the great meltdown should have evened out those weird discrepancies more than actually happened - there's a kind of inertia to price guides that is resistant to reality at times.

Interesting that the 1958 3d and the 1958 sixpence were identified as scarce in BU even whilst they were still currency. I really wouldn't have guessed that. If anyone who worked at the Royal Mint between 1957 and 1959 ever comes across this discussion it would be very interesting if they would share their insights into the mystery. I wonder if large quantities of certain coins were shipped out to colonies that then become independent in the late '50s to mid '60s and whether, in some way, this had an effect on subsequent scarcity. I personally have always found it slightly remarkable that collectors resisted the temptation to spend their BU coins. I mean, pre-credit cards if you were out of cash then your nice shiny 1958 threepence that you'd stashed away would suddenly seem like an expendable luxury!

I well remember in the years leading up to decimalisation that my gran and mum, along with many others no doubt, kept a little list in their purse showing the dates worth keeping. They all knew about the H's, KN's pre 1920 silver, etc. and so I'm sure there's proportionally far more of these coins laying around, though mainly in no better than fair condition. The high grade coins would have needed to be pulled from circulation at the time when very few people were looking for them.

[Peter 615]

It is a bit like the 1988 £ coin.I plucked about 20 out of circulation.Then I bought a 1988 year set and another UNC one so I spent the circulated ones.

[Peckris 579]

Yep, you're right. There's no difference. Case closed. Thanks for the photoshop work on this one.

As far I can see this is due to optical conditions - light/shadow being a little different on the two coins.

But bear in mind - there is a range of scarcity of BU George VI brass 3d's that exceeds most other denominations. Viz.:

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939 and 1948

Not so easy to find - 1945

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

So a BU 1939 is worth paying a reasonable sum for. Coins that are ABU or GEF are generally quite a lot easier to find, this scale refers to genuine BU only.

You have nicely summed up George VI brass threepence collecting in one paragraph. As for Elizabeth II, just to complete the list, I've added the 1953 type 2 obverse and the standard 1958 which seem to be scarcer in true BU than their mintage numbers would suggest. Perhaps the availability of the 'plastic set' gave a false impression that BU specimens of the '53 were fairly common and hence were not worth hoarding. But of course it was only the type 1 that came with the sets. As for the 1958, these seem to be weirdly scarce in true BU despite a mintage of over 20 million! My only guess is that they were issued in numbers sufficiently high as not to be perceived as worth collecting, only to then fall victim to the big meltdown after decimalisation.

Very rare - 1946 and 1949

Rare - 1951

Very scarce - 1950

Scarce - 1939, 1948 and 1953 type 2 obv.

Not so easy to find - 1945 and 1958

Slightly easier to find - 1938, 1940, 1952

Normal - 1941

Easy - 1937, 1942, 1943, 1944

The 1958 3d is one of those weird inexplicable cases - it was actually identified as a scarcity in BU before decimalisation, as was the 1946 halfpenny, and other strange items like the 1957S shilling (the 1957E is really common in UNC) and the 1958E shilling. Not forgetting the 1958 sixpence and who knows how many others too. I guess we may never know why some dates are scarcer than others - it may be a combination of factors, e.g. time of year issued, whether any were held back, demand for certain denominations being greater at some times, a shortage in one denomination causing lower denominations to circulate more, the hoarding of certain dates more than others for different reasons...

One thing's for sure, the great meltdown should have evened out those weird discrepancies more than actually happened - there's a kind of inertia to price guides that is resistant to reality at times.

Interesting that the 1958 3d and the 1958 sixpence were identified as scarce in BU even whilst they were still currency. I really wouldn't have guessed that. If anyone who worked at the Royal Mint between 1957 and 1959 ever comes across this discussion it would be very interesting if they would share their insights into the mystery. I wonder if large quantities of certain coins were shipped out to colonies that then become independent in the late '50s to mid '60s and whether, in some way, this had an effect on subsequent scarcity. I personally have always found it slightly remarkable that collectors resisted the temptation to spend their BU coins. I mean, pre-credit cards if you were out of cash then your nice shiny 1958 threepence that you'd stashed away would suddenly seem like an expendable luxury!

Actually, 1958 (along with 1954) is something of a key year for scarcities in BU - the halfcrown, florin, English shilling, sixpence, and brass 3d, are all supposedly scarce. 1959 is overrated by comparison, except that the Scottish shilling is very difficult in true UNC. Why there should be so many in one year is anyone's guess.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Peckris