| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 2,743 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Turkey
870 Posts |
Hi guys, This 1998 1 Pound coin which I happen to find in circulation sometime between 2013-2014 in Edinburgh has generated some conversation so I decided to take advantage of today's beautiful sunshine and take some close up photos of it, using a 3x loop from a kid science set. :-) On the two coin picture, I put a circulated 1983 Pound coin on the right, and the 1998 one is on the left. On edge inscriptions pictures I tried to put it between a 1983 and a 1988 coins to compare I didn't have other circulated coins with the same edge inscriptions. On the four coin picture, it's the second on one the right I'm looking forward to hear what're your opinions. Something that caught my eye is, on REG:F:D seems weakly struck. This may indicate a forgery but I think I remember same weak strikes in post-2000 pound coins in circulation, specially the bridge series (from pocket change in my travels to England). However the dots across the rim (Pearl's?) Seem to be the same with the 1983 coin that I compared the tails side. What do you guys think? Ps.: sorry about the pictures. I made them using a basic mobile phone and a 3x loop. I'm definitely not the person one would ask to take pictures at weddings. :-)        Edited by molydeii
05/13/2020 1:56 pm
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
17959 Posts |
The 1998 pound coin was only issued in sets. According to the Fake Pound Coin Database, most of those found in circulation are forgeries, although of course some Uncircualated sets will have been opened and spent...
Apart from one type that uses a Channel Islands obverse die, the 1998 forgeries are of a high quality.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Turkey
870 Posts |
NumisRob= Yes, I do know that 1998-1999 pound coins are only issued in sets. That's why I got quite excited when I found that one in circulation. It feels quite genuine at hand, doesn't have the feeling of inferior pound fakes (I have about 15 of those fakes as well, it was fun spotting them back then).
What is your opinion on this one, chances are its fake but it's much better than any other fake I have seen it remember seeing.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
17959 Posts |
Quote:
What is your opinion on this one To me it looks genuine. I've found several genuine NIFC coins from the 1980s and 1990s in change. The earlier Royal Mint BU sets were not that expensive, and were often sold off cheap at the end of the year - I remember buying a 1992 set from the 'reduced price' bin at my local post office in early 1993 for only about 50p over face value! So these coins did get into circulation - kids got the sets as presents, weren't interested in them and just spent the coins, or maybe even a collector got an extra cheap set just to get the commemorative 50p or £2 and spent the other coins. Not to mention thieves disposing of their hauls. Before the recent collecting mania with the Olympic and Beatrix Potter 50p's there was little interest in collecting GB decimal coins and dealers would probably not have paid over face value for BU mint sets. Edited by NumisRob
05/14/2020 05:10 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Turkey
870 Posts |
NumisRob : I remember buying BU mint sets from 1980's and 1990's in London's Embankment coin market at very affordable prices, back in 2009-2010. They often had damaged sleeves and cardboards, so sellers often sell them a pound or two above face value. That's how I got most of my BU Decimal UK coins. I think I got your point. It has a genuine feeling compared with other Pound coins, but who knows.
Edited by molydeii
05/14/2020 10:41 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1321 Posts |
I agree with Numisrob - this is a genuine 1998 pound.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Turkey
870 Posts |
NumisRob & andyg, thank you guys. It's really exciting to been able to find this from circulation.
|
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
188 Posts |
Hi molydeii. Your 1998 looks exactly how the higher quality 1998 fakes mentioned by NumisRob DO look, with the thin rims and slightly fainter face detail. See the Database page at: http://www.thefakepoundcoindatabase...rieties.htmlIf you line up the edge with a non-suspect, later type DECUS edge you will see numerous differences including the height and shape of letters, the word spacing, the crosslet. On the 'Magic Motto' fakes as we called them, the M is asymmetrical and the crosslet is not the 3D figure it should be. They have indeed fooled many people and during the 2017 surge were fetching about £30. There were even people who acknowledged the flaws but insisted they were 'seconds' quietly circulated by the Mint. Never mind the slight colour difference or the other varieties with the deviant motto, including 1995 mule Oaks. Edited by Moralclimate
07/20/2020 5:51 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Turkey
870 Posts |
@Moralclimate thank you for the information! As much h as I remeber I received this on in change after a cafe purchase in central Edinburgh back in sometime 2013-2014, or maybe earlier. In hand, the metal and feeling, the flan of the coin feels very real compared to some 20 other different (and commonly documented online) round pound fakes.
I used to travel to England and Scotland frequently up until 2016. Long before that, when I was much younger, England is the first country I had been to outside where I live and a younger me was quite fascinated by the coins circulating there. Since then I try to , rather modestly, collect British coinage along with some others.
I'll try to get some nicer pictures of this coin when I am back home. I'll also try to get its precise weight and will check the crosslet. At the moment this little guy is a mystery to me but I enjoy having it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
695 Posts |
Wow come one on guys you can see its a fake all day long. Horses face lengths and head size completely different and so is the tail. one with wide arc and the other short and looping. The A in tamen is a boat ride away from the T . More than enough evidence there to be 100% certain its a jeckyl. IMO :)
|
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
188 Posts |
@zookeeperz. On the matter of the incuse lettering, that needs to be compared with the later type, rather than the Roman type comparison examples above. Here are a real 1993, 2002 and fake 1998 (bottom). As you can see the T-A distance is correctly about 2.5 reeds. However, as above the U-T distance (2nd T) is >3 reeds on the fake and <3 reeds on the genuine later type. Note also the differently shaped M on these fakes versus my two genuine.   Edited by Moralclimate
08/07/2020 07:14 am
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 2,743 |
|
Posted 05/13/2020 2:04 pm
