Comments on "Decimal reverse designs with variations"

[<k>]

Parent topic:  Decimal reverse designs with variations
Click on the link above to access the parent topic. Please post any comments on the topic here.

[<k>]

In addition to my topic about the standard coinage: Milestones in the decimal coinage of UK, I also would like to make a small series of topics that look at its minor anomalies. It's best to keep those topics in the format of "Topic" and "Comments on topic", I think, so that we end up with a series of well-defined references.

Here I would like to ask if you think I have missed any significant reverse design variations, which I have defined as those that are easily visible without the use of a magnifying glass. I should add that these are deliberate variations. Eventually I will add a similar topic that deals with significant errors on decimal coins. If and when we identify any more, they can easily be added to the main topic.

[Figleaf]

Were there any obvious changes when the 5 and 10 p were diminished in size?

Peter

[<k>]

No, the designs remained exactly the same. They were part of the original Ironside design series, which was still extant then, so it would have been too tricky to change them.

[FosseWay]

No, the designs remained exactly the same. They were part of the original Ironside design series, which was still extant then, so it would have been too tricky to change them.

The basic designs remained the same, but on the 10p at least two different reverse dies were used. The differences mainly concentrate on the tufts of fur on the lion's stomach - how many there are and how distinct from the body they are.

The 5p underwent some minor design changes to the reverse during the 1980s. The first circulation coins with the tweaked reverse were the large issues of 1987, but I have a feeling the changes were actually made in an earlier year, but the lack of circulation coins between 1981 and 1986 mean that they're only in sets.

[SandyGuyUK]

I noticed that there were some difference to the design of the 5 pence between 1982 (when "NEW" was changed to "FIVE") and when it shrunk in 1990.

Have a look at the attached images (courtesy of eBay - I hope that's OK?) - which show a 1980s modified design 5 pence and then look at the two coins in the 1990 set.

Notice that the legend is slightly smaller on the 1980s version and nearer the rim - this was definitely not the case on the 1990 version.

Best regards

Ian

[<k>]

Notice that the legend is slightly smaller on the 1980s version and nearer the rim - this was definitely not the case on the 1990 version.

It looks to be the case, but it's hard to be certain that it's not a trick of the light or just the image. Did you actually manage to measure the difference in the distance? Was it a millimeter or two?

[<k>]

The 5p underwent some minor design changes to the reverse during the 1980s. The first circulation coins with the tweaked reverse were the large issues of 1987, but I have a feeling the changes were actually made in an earlier year, but the lack of circulation coins between 1981 and 1986 mean that they're only in sets.

I've shown the change here. It occurred in 1982, when the word "NEW" was removed from the legends. But that was only in sets, as you say. I'd bought the UNC set from the Mint and remember sitting with it on my knee. I noticed the changes to the 5p and 10p straightaway. You are right that the 5p was not issued to circulation for many years (1981 to 1986). You can find  the Royal Mint's mintage figures here.

on the 10p at least two different reverse dies were used. The differences mainly concentrate on the tufts of fur on the lion's stomach - how many there are and how distinct from the body they are.

I'd never noticed that. Occasionally when dies wear out, a new artist will copy the original design, so there are invariably changes. I did notice a few changes to various parts of the lion on the 50p (and a lot of other things) when the word "NEW" was removed in 1982.

[<k>]

Questions:

1] Who thinks hertfordian has noted a significant variation that should go in the main topic? I find it hard to decide.

2] Does FosseWay have images of the 10p lion that clearly show the differences? I understand that he either didn't believe or didn't know that there are lions indigenous to India, so I find it hard to believe he is an expert on lions. 

[Alan71]

There's a bit about the tufts of fur under "10p Die Varieties":

http://www.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk/dec10.html

[<k>]

Thanks, Alan. Again, they don't seem immediately obvious unless you're looking for them. I suppose you could call the tuft variations "messy" and "less messy".    I think it was a side-effect of providing new dies and not a deliberate amendment. The 1982 amendments, e.g. to Britannia (50p) and the crowned thistle (5p) were definitely deliberate amendments.

[africancoins]

From that "coins-of-the-uk" page...

>>2005: Rev A: Circulation. Rev B: BU Sets & Circulation (both types common)<<

The attached shows 2005: Rev A: Circulation and Rev B: Circulation.

Image I did over 10 years ago.

Thanks Mr Paul Baker

[<k>]

Thanks for those. It's the first time I noted it, but while interesting, I'd mark it as housekeeping to the dies and not a deliberate design amendment.

[Alan71]

Die varieties could be a whole new topic if its own.  From the same website I linked earlier:

"A letter from Dr. R.M.Owens to Coin News in the January 2013 issue has brought to my notice that there are two varieties of the portcullis reverse. In Die A the bolts at the junctions of the bars are represented by raised dots, while in Die B they are represented by incuse circles. He reports that Die A is known for 1971-1994 and 2007-2008, while Die B is known for 1992-2007, with both types known for 1992-4 and 2007."

[FosseWay]

Questions:

...

2] Does FosseWay have images of the 10p lion that clearly show the differences? I understand that he either didn't believe or didn't know that there are lions indigenous to India, so I find it hard to believe he is an expert on lions. 

I don't remember having pronounced on the existence or otherwise of lions in India...

Anyway, here are pictures of the two varieties. 813 has four rather indistinct tufts of fur on the lion's underside, to the right of its "armpit" (for want of a better anatomical expression) They seem to be barely attached to the lion, giving a rather expressionistic "idea" of fur. On 5351 the tufts are larger and less distinctly separate from each other, but much better defined and clearly attached to the lion.