An Indian proof 1954 pice coin this time

Again sorry for the crappy pics...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And now for the reverse...

 

sweet, this was the first coin i ever collected , ofcourse mine was nowhere nice as the one displayed, it was a circulated worn out one Nice pics, thx for sharing

 

Very nice looking coin, I realy like the horse :hail: I dont collect modern Indian but that is one I woudnt mind in proof condition

 

Please note it is a Calcutta mint proof. This fact makes it even more sweeter to own!

 

There were no proofs made in calcutta for 1954 check your KM.

 

Was it only Mumbai that produced proofs for that period?

 

yes Bombay was the only mint for the 1950 and 1954 proofs. in fact if i remember correctly it would be the eighties before calcutta started producing proofs again

 

Is this even a proof. The pics dosen't really conclude that it is. Just because its shiny doesn't mean its a proof.

(v), what did NGC say on the slab, assuming it is NGC slabbed.

 

I just like the design It remindes me of some medals and coins I have seen from Brunswick (Germany)

 

Not in Krause does not mean coin does not exist or not minted.

There are many examples of Indian coins I can give-- Land Vital Resource Rs 2 not in my older Krause, but now in the latest edition. The 1960 Rupee pattern still not in Krause, but the most expensive pattern ever sold. The 20 paise pattern, not in Krause. There are many date/mint combinations of currency coins not in Krause, but they do exist.

As far as this coin in concerned, it was plucked from a proof set. I have multiple 1954 proof sets, and there is only one other which has a 1954 proof with no Bombay mint mark. I am new to the boards but not to the hobby and know the difference between a proof and a gem BU and all these are definitely proofs.

I do not know why this happened to be-- maybe the mint employees were playing or the C mint dies sent to Bombay, or coin restuck at Calcutta or whatever. This would remain a mystery unless someone does research and finds out. These instance add to the mystique surrounding early Republic of India coinage and also add to the charm of collecting.

I have a Bombay Presidency 1804 2 pices proof mule (I will post the pictures later) which definitely is not a mistake and handiwork of mint employees. This came from London and the dies were never shipped to India, so no chance of restrike.

 

Looks like its in a NGC slab so what does the Ngc label say it is?

 

One of them says PF and the other PL.

 

Two? I thought this was one coin. And PL is not a proof.

 

There are two similar coins. PL is "Proof Like".

For Indian coins NGC used to give PF designation to proof restrike coins and make a note as "Restrike"-- eg. "PF65 Restrike", but later changed it to PL to distinguish between the original and later restrikes.

PCGS hands out "PF Original" and "PF Restrike" and also "SP" designation for these.

ANACS hands out both "PF restrike" and "MS restrike".

ICG I do not know about.


Proof as all of us know is method of production-- specially prepared blanks and two strikings, quality and all that. The proof restrikes (British India) which NGC labels as PL go through this process and are proofs, though inferior in quality since the dies are polished to death. The PL designation in my opinion is to protect the buyer from sellers who peddle their restrike wares as originals, since there is a great price differential.

I again would like to say I may be new to this forum but not to the hobby and have handled original and restrikes of British India so can know the difference.

 

The OP has been found once again and now he is coming with some other story. for those who asked why hasnt indian numismatics taken off you see exactly why. the story changes on a daily basis

 

What found out and what once again? I have maintained I plucked this off a proof set, NGC graded one as PF and the other as PL..I showed one type.....what?????

I have to be blunt now that you have been feeding a lot of wrong information to unsuspecting folks. Information like all types of coins being manufactured and available for the right amount to stories like new dies for obsolete coins being created. Ludicrous. And to top of claims of having examined George VI coins stuck on blanks intended for other denominations. I challenge you to prove these all statements and if proved wrong will issue an open apology. I can compile all these statements and you can bring forward proof in forms of auction catalog lots to pictures of coins you encountered to references in Pridmore.

But I know what you would do... would say you built your credibility on this forum and people worship you here and what not...and will avoid all this.

If you are what you claim please take up this challenge. I am again willing to say that I will tender an apology if you can prove your statements. Willing to take up the challenge?

I believe you would not.

Good night.

And in the meantime I will take the only good advice you used to give in your erstwhile signature (of a couple of days back) and not argue with your type of people.

Please respond only if you intend to prove these charges... if not no need to worry. :computer: :vanish::smile

 

let me tell u these off handed insults wont get u anywhere u are a disgrace to indian numismatics and coin collecting in general every time u have been caught lying u have changed ur statements. first u claimed its a calcutta mint proof then u claimed its a bombay mint proof without mintmark then you said its a prooflike. truly a shame and i dont entertain people of your disposition. you have no credibility, dignity or honor and you are an idiot to boot and your apology is worth nothing. People who spit in the wind have their face covered in it just like you are now.

I wonder how you sleep at night too bad you couldnt understand that my signature has not changed (proof that you are an idiot) was meant for your kind of people who pop in every now and then

 

I just said it is a proof-- either a C mint proof or a B mint w/o mint mark proof. Where is the lying part come from?

I don't see your signature even now...

It is you who would be embarrassed if I get all your statements in one place and then challenge you to prove it...I will do so tomorrow...

Now no use of arguing with people like you who claim to know the story of the 1911 hoard and skirt around the issue never telling the tale........

 

Problem with lies is you are caught in your own web. enjoy!!!


it hurts when the whole world sees through you in one thread doesnt it? must be a shame that your games didnt work here