Nit: The question is are they the same coin type, not the same coin.
Or framed a different way, would someone who collects Canadian coins by type want one example of each variation? For me the answer is yes, obviously a type collector would want examples with and without the logo.
And the people who set up those pages obviously agree.
Although the Km assigned numbers are the same as there is no difference between material, size or weight - I believe that the additional logo on the design under the queens portrait does differentiate the two groups. Up to 2006 and afterwards, a different type of the same design.
I would be inclined to contact NumisMaster and ask if they could reassign the Km numbers for the ones with the logo, maybe with an “a“, „b“ or „.1“ rather than trying to get Numista to put them on the same page. There is a good case for that.
(Note; I do not know if prefix of „a“, „b“ or „.1“ have a specific criteria which needs to be met. For example „a“ is sometimes used with a metal change with the exact same design and size.)
„If your reply or post in the Forum stinks of AI, I will call you out! Knowledge comes from experience, the I in AI stands for incompetence.“
When you look at the N#'s you see there is a large difference. For instance the first two: 421 and 377456. The second two: 19977 and 377353. The last one: 472 and 377647 and so forth.
All these coin pairs were on the same page at one time. Here is the first one from 2017:
These coins were discussed in the forum and the decision was made to split the pages because of the logo vs. the P(lated) or no mark, hence the large difference in N#'s.
As far as Numismaster, SCWC does not recognize there were copper plated zinc pennies from 2007-2012. It would require them to more than just change KM490 to KM490c (KM490a and 490b are already taken). KM# 490 should have been removed from N#421 when it was split.
As a specialist collector of Canadian coins I can say that no they are not the same coin, I have them listed separately with the composition and mint mark being the difference between the two types. Canadian coins collecting is sometimes a complex and frustrating pass time with some coins with the Arnold Machin obverse having slight differences in the portrait for instance the 1965 issue was altered slightly in 1979, then the 12 sided cent replaces the round cent which in turn was replaced by another round coin, there are three obverse types of coins with no mint mark, a P under the portrait and finally the mintmark . I hope this makes sense 🫡
For these coins the composition between the pairs is identical. There are no mint marks per se, just a P to signify being plated or the RCM logo which is not really a mint mark since it's on coins from different mints.
i never mentioned the P being a mint mark merely that it appeared on the obverse hence a different variety, but the maple leaf is an official mark that it was minted by the RCM hence a mint mark. Collecting Canadian coins is a minefield for new collectors due to the variations in coinage, as I stated I list them as separate coins in my collection.
i never mentioned the P being a mint mark merely that it appeared on the obverse hence a different variety, but the maple leaf is an official mark that it was minted by the RCM hence a mint mark. Collecting Canadian coins is a minefield for new collectors due to the variations in coinage, as I stated I list them as separate coins in my collection.
OK but Numista specifically states mint marks do not necessitate a new type, just a different variety of the same type. The new type was created because the design (mint logo) was added to the coins.
Any your comment about them being different compositions.? All the pairs of coins being discussed have identical compositions. That was also stated in the original post.
I'd say it's up to the referee if there were one. A lot of effort was spent to split them a couple of years ago. I don't think it makes much sense to recombine them now.
Status geändert zu Gelöst(Menu82025, 2 Jan. 2026, 16:40)
