| Author |
Replies: 30 / Views: 4,837 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day, try a Vernier Scale, sometimes called Vernier calipers. They come in metal or plastic. $50 at Repco; $10 at Bunnings; $2.50 at Supa-Cheap Autos ... really. Go to this website for a pic, but if you read too much of the article, you'll probably get a headache. I'm only suggesting you have an idea what you're looking for, when you go shopping: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernier_scaleNote: the two sets of jaws - upper and lower in the pic - are for measuring internal & external diameters respectively. OR - here's a completely different tac: put your coin next to a standard 0ne-cent and a standard five-cent; take a photograph - which we know you can do; expand the image on the 'puter; then see whether your coin is the same as one of the standards, and if so, which one. This is probably more reliable than trying the measure two effigies of the Queen, that differ by less than 2mm. I'll be interested to hear the outcome. Peter
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
Peter - I did what you suggested, with putting the 3 coins side by side and taking a pic. Unfortunately, I couldn't get hold of a 'loose' 1981 5c so I used the next best thing a 1982 5c. =o) I took the pic, and to my surprise, all 3 were different... Albiet the two 5c were pretty close. The 1c and 5c obverses were not so close in size in the picture as they seemed with my eyes, which strengthens my argument about needing better glasses hehe. I used GIMP picture editing software which has a measuring tool, and although it is not an actual size measurment it gives me numbers that can tell me if the two were different. Well The coin is definately not a 1c/5c mule, but it does pose a question or two about the sizes between the two 5c pieces. Are their different sized lettering between the '81 & '82 5c, and was the measurments rim to rim different between the two years different also? I believe it was Nancy who earlier mentioned different size reverses, I will take a picture later of the two reverses and check that too =o). Image: 551.jpg77.46 KB Thankyou all for your help, so far. I am very much appreciative. Jacko
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
Some 5¢ had large & small reverses, but I can't recall if 1981 was involved. I'm sure there's some info somewhere about them somewhere on the net, but I had a look around & can't locate it.
I know 1984-86 had 2 diff sized reverses.
Once again, Brissyboy will probably have all the info about it.
life is a mystery to be lived not a problem to be solved
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
335 Posts |
Very slight differences will occur because of different Mints eg RAM (Canberra) and RM (Llantrisant) as well as different dies used by a Mint both within a year and between years. If your 1981 5c was struck at the RM and the 1982 5c was from the RAM, there will be some difference as it has already been documented for the 1981 5c issues from RAM, RM and RCM. The rims can be different also depending on the Mint or even the presses/machines. The reeding which is struck by another die can also vary between Mints. Wayne
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
335 Posts |
5 cents Die Varieties 1966 - RM London and RAM Canberra - both reverse and obverse dies differ according to the Mint. 1967 to 1971 - RAM - reverse appears to be London die or a recut Canberra version of it. Obverse differs a little between years, 1968 seems to have thicker text. 1972 - RAM - two reverse dies eg low as for previous years and high where wider gap exists between rim and SD under Echidna, this new reverse now becomes the standard. 1973 to 1980 - RAM - new standard reverse as for high 1972 type. Obverse differs slightly, around 1976/77 edge line placed around hair of back of head. 1981 - RAM - as previous year. RM (Llantrisant) - similar to RAM but obverse size varies slightly. RCM (Winnipeg) - reverse similar to RAM. Obverse has different hair lines at rear base of head, size of obverse differs to RAM and RM. Text appears finer. 1982 to 1983 - RAM - similar to previous RAM issue. 1984 - RAM - two reverses eg high reverse as previously and new low reverse with slightly larger Echidna which will become new standard. 1985 - RAM - mint set and proof set only - all appear to have high reverse. New obverse effigy. 1986 - RAM - mint set and proof set only - has both reverse varieties. 1987 - RAM - said to have both reverse varieties but the high reverse extremely rare and not yet sighted by me. 1988 - RAM - all now the new standard low reverse. Obverse has thin and thick text types. 1989 to 1990 - RAM - all new standard low reverse. Obverse thin text. 1991 to 1994 - RAM - two or three reverse varieties found eg size of SD varies (small or wide SD, standard or normal SD and large SD). 1994 large SD scarce. 1995 to 1997 - RAM all appear to have standard reverse (normal SD). 1998 - RAM - reverse appears to have small and normal SD. 1999 - RAM - reverse appears to be standard but small SD may exist. Obverse has new effigy of Queen. 2000 - RAM - reverse has small and normal SD. Obverse text font, IRB font and size of effigy vary to that of 1999. 2001 - RAM - reverse may have small and normal SD. Obverse differs to that of 2000 with text font, etc. Two obverse exist for 2001 most noticeable by spacing of IRB under Queen. 2002 to 2006 - RAM - small and normal SD. Obverse may vary slightly and IRB appears joined for most. 2006 may have two obverses where I of IRB appears spaced or not from the RB. 2007 - RAM - three reverse varieties eg small and normal SD as previous and a new tiny SD which may become new standard. Tiny SD appears to be very scarce. 2008 - RAM - still to be defined but Mint Sets have normal and tiny SD varieties. Hope this helps a little.
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
WOW!!, Brissyboy where did you get this information? I am blown away, 5c pieces have lots of errors... which means more work in looking hehe =o) I thank you for your help I will have to get my hands on more '81 5c pieces, and get a visual on the differences, to identify the matching mint.
On a different note, I didn't know if I should start another thread or not, but has anyone noticed joining in the lettering on the obverse of the 1 dollar coins? I need to pull out the collection, but so far from what I had laying around I have found the 'RA' in 'AUSTRALIA' joined on 1984, 1985, 1994 & 1995 coins, and seperated on 1984, 2000, 2005 (M.O.R), 2006 & 2008 (M.O.R). I tried looking on searches and in here with the search, but nothing as yet.
Jacko
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
Sorry I mean't that the 5c pieces have lots of Varieties.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
372 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
Gnome, excuse my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean? in regards to the rim?
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
372 Posts |
The edge of the coin..My appologies meant the edge of the coin as well. Check the reeding. 
Edited by gnome 07/02/2008 12:09 am
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
335 Posts |
Jackool:- Quote: On a different note, I didn't know if I should start another thread or not, but has anyone noticed joining in the lettering on the obverse of the 1 dollar coins? I need to pull out the collection, but so far from what I had laying around I have found the 'RA' in 'AUSTRALIA' joined on 1984, 1985, 1994 & 1995 coins, and seperated on 1984, 2000, 2005 (M.O.R), 2006 & 2008 (M.O.R). I tried looking on searches and in here with the search, but nothing as yet. Jacko, You cannot really compare 1984 with 1985-98 or those to 1999-2008 as the Queen's effigy is different and therefore the text around her will be different for each effigy type. However you can look within obverse effigy types. For the 1984 Arnold Machin effigy, it has been noted that the obverse text can have RA separated or joined which hopefully are die varieties and not something else such a press pressure, etc. For the Raphael Malouf effigy 1985 to 1998, I'm not sure if any obverse varieties have been found. I have always suspected that on some denominations such as the 20c or $1 that the effigy maybe slightly smaller or larger as it seems the text was either further or closer to the rims, respectively. Now with the Ian Rank-Broadley effigy 1999 to 2008 (also on some 1998 silver issues), the RAM have continually been modifying the obverse (size of effigy, size and style of the font for text, date and IRB initials, position of text in relation to effigy and/or rim). Most of these "adjustments" can be observed for years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, across all denominations at some stage and more recently for 20c and/or 50c eg 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008. Do you have Greg McDonald's pocketbook catalogue 15th edition? Many nof the varieties are listed in this edition, with more to come in his 16th edition. Wayne
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
Gnome - I get what you mean now, sorry about that. I have checked the edge/reeding all the way around, and it is normal.
Brissyboy - I have just got Greg McDonald's 15th and it is fantastic!! I have only glanced at parts, but it seems incredibly informative. Thankyou for the suggestion. So in regard to the 1984's, I opened a roll of 1984's and I had in the first 3 I looked at, 1 with joined RA, 1 with seperated RA & a nice black flaw on another which takes part of the text with it, which was a nice surprise =o). I am curious as to which are the more common... Out of all the circulated '84 dollars I have checked in the last few days (not many)8 seperate & 2 joined. I suspect by the small amount that I have checked, that seperate might be more the common.
Jacko
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
153 Posts |
Wayne its time you publish your own Decimal Varieties book and I am sure Ian Pitt will do it for you and it will be a great success. I have the Pre Decimal Variety book,cobwebs ie Ians decimal book,and what is missing is a Rennicks Decimal Varieties/Error guide and you are the perfect author for it Please consider doing it
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
A guide to decimal varieties & errors would be wonderful.  Wayne certainly seems to have all the variety info cued up. Just need to convince him to get it into print. 
life is a mystery to be lived not a problem to be solved
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
70 Posts |
Wayne I fully agree with Johnsopet & Nancy, you seem to have a plethora of information about errors and varieties of the decimal currency. Definately something to think about. If you had it published, I am almost dead certain that most of us here would be happy to buy a copy... Signed by the author of course hehe =o)
Jacko
|
| |
Replies: 30 / Views: 4,837 |