coin grading

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Hi . i recently purchased an 1876H penny.The thing i am confused with is its been graded by c.g.s. as a specimen strike.I no it might not be a big deal,does this just mean its a good early strike ?. sorry i cant download the pictures .However its c.g.s. uin 26028.If someone can put the pictures up would appreciate it.At a caravan in abersoch and the computer keeps going off.

Many thanks .

Pete.

[Paulus 1,975]

This is CGS 26028:

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Thank you so much ,have you any opinions paulus as to why it would be graded specimen strike ?

[Peckris 579]

Thank you so much ,have you any opinions paulus as to why it would be graded specimen strike ?

My first impression is that it looks only like a good currency example. However, the reverse - when you look closer - has the appearance that if you held it at a certain angle, would have a prooflike sheen to it.

However, that could still mean it was an early strike using (perhaps) a proof die? You'd probably have to see it in hand.

Edited August 16, 2014 by Peckris

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Thanks peck .The real question is how can c.g.s .determine a specimen strike and grade the coin as the only one they have graded.As opposed to just a high grade normal issue

[Peter 615]

It looks like a good strike,

A few problems

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Hi peter yes the problems are obvious , however why a specimen one only graded ?

[Rob 3,152]

This is all part of the question as to whether the Heaton Mint produced proofs from polished flans to the Royal Mint standards or a slightly inferior product that was an early strike from polished dies but not exhibiting all the characteristics one would experct of a proof. The same argument has been put forward for halfpennies and farthings. Freeman contended that the Heaton strikes were proofs, whereas Peck and others maintain they are not.

Somewhere else on the forum I have previously posted images of a 'normal' 1876H 1/2d compared to a 'specimen' or 'proof' depending on your point of view. I can't find the relevant thread at present, but the reverse of the normal coin is prooflike in the hand. The specimen or proof is infinitely superior both in strike and brilliance of field.

[Peckris 579]

This is all part of the question as to whether the Heaton Mint produced proofs from polished flans to the Royal Mint standards or a slightly inferior product that was an early strike from polished dies but not exhibiting all the characteristics one would experct of a proof. The same argument has been put forward for halfpennies and farthings. Freeman contended that the Heaton strikes were proofs, whereas Peck and others maintain they are not.

Somewhere else on the forum I have previously posted images of a 'normal' 1876H 1/2d compared to a 'specimen' or 'proof' depending on your point of view. I can't find the relevant thread at present, but the reverse of the normal coin is prooflike in the hand. The specimen or proof is infinitely superior both in strike and brilliance of field.

I have a couple of bun halfpennies sold to me by Peter Viola, that could both qualify as 'specimen' (one's an 1876H too) - the fields are iridescent and prooflike, but are not actual proofs. I'd put up pictures but scans destroy any gorgeousness of tone.

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Still after looking at the coin to be graded as a specimen strike rather than a high grade normal issue can only come down to the fields in the blank ?

[Peckris 579]

Still after looking at the coin to be graded as a specimen strike rather than a high grade normal issue can only come down to the fields in the blank ?

I'm not sure whether there is any such thing - officially - as a 'specimen strike' for bun bronzes; is there anything written up on this?

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Nothing i can find peck and no big deal.Would be interested in c.g.s. opinion but not loosing any sleep.

[coinkat 21]

Interesting coin. Would a commercial/business strike have rims like the one in the image?

[Rob 3,152]

Interesting coin. Would a commercial/business strike have rims like the one in the image?

This is partly where the discussion lies. To demonstrate, I don't have any pennies, but I do have a pair of 1876H halfpennies which asks the same question. The Heaton proof/specimen has much less sharp lettering than say the unambiguous 1867 bronzed proof, http://www.colincooke.com/coin_images/halfpenny_merge/397.jpg i.e. it ticks some boxes but not others.

For comparison sake, here is the 1876H which was slabbed as a proof in the Terner sale and was considered a proof by Freeman (this was his coin also). However, others considered it to fall short, preferring to call it a specimen strike and so the debate continues............

[Peckris 579]

Interesting coin. Would a commercial/business strike have rims like the one in the image?

This is partly where the discussion lies. To demonstrate, I don't have any pennies, but I do have a pair of 1876H halfpennies which asks the same question. The Heaton proof/specimen has much less sharp lettering than say the unambiguous 1867 bronzed proof, http://www.colincooke.com/coin_images/halfpenny_merge/397.jpg i.e. it ticks some boxes but not others.

For comparison sake, here is the 1876H which was slabbed as a proof in the Terner sale and was considered a proof by Freeman (this was his coin also). However, others considered it to fall short, preferring to call it a specimen strike and so the debate continues............

That certainly ticks many of the proof boxes for me, but I am only looking at a picture at the end of the day. However, could it not be argued that Heatons didn't have the proof minting expertise of the RM and that therefore their proof strikings are a little inferior?

[PWA 1967 2,135]

The rim on mine could never be determined as a proof peck unless mistruck .Think i will just send c.g.s. a mail .I just see it as a nice coin from circulation in a good grade.

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Hi.The information i have been given is that heaton mint produced samples for this year in limited numbers .After talking to numerous people including c.g.s seems to make sense

[VickySilver 830]

The Royal Mint has been known to release "proofs" not up to the standards of Royal Mint proofs!

[Peckris 579]

The Royal Mint has been known to release "proofs" not up to the standards of Royal Mint proofs! ..........

..... since 1971