Tongo 10 Seniti FAO KM#69

I stubled upon this accidentally, looking at the numista listing. This is really interesting!

We have this note:
In 2012, an additional 512,000 1981-dated coins were minted by the Royal Australian Mint.

2002 and 2005 coins are magnetic (Ni plated Fe). But they have slightly different desing (most noticable on 10s piece by two branches of banana that point at A and L or between A and L. Your piece has the same reverse as 2005. Old 1981 coins have the older rev. 

It's similar to supplementary coinage of 20 and 50 seniti which are a bit different than originals anyway, but they are not the new alloy, rather the old one. 

We definitely miss this date in this listing:
edit// sent the wrong link
N#8036
 

Ah, I see what happened. I added the comment to KM#69 based on the 2012 Royal Australian Mint annual report, assuming the 1981-dated coins were the same composition. I now see that an additional year should be added to the KM#69a page. I will make the modification requests now.

Tonga, not Tongo, please modify title.

@Ulmo 

Sjoelund

Tonga, not Tongo, please modify title.

And the “master of varieties” may issue pictures for 10, 20 50 Senti design variation for 1981 magnetic / non magnetic 😉

Some_Nerd

Ah, I see what happened. I added the comment to KM#69 based on the 2012 Royal Australian Mint annual report, assuming the 1981-dated coins were the same composition. I now see that an additional year should be added to the KM#69a page. I will make the modification requests now.

Your comment for KM#69:

“In 2012, an additional 512,000 1981-dated coins were minted by the Royal Australian Mint.”

might be complemented : 

“In 2012, an additional 512,000 1981-dated coins were minted by the Royal Australian Mint. They are magnetic and listed in the KM#69a page”

Then for 20 Senti 1981 and 50 Senti 1981, these new coins might request separate 1981 lines cause there were not minted at the same time and they get a slightly different design.

I don't think so, the types do NOT overlap in a year, so for me there are no varieties.

Sure they are not varieties, so they should have separate lines:

- 20 Senti 1981

- 20 senti 1981 (minted in 2012)

Drawings would explain design differences to guide the collector and I'm sure you are keen to guide collectors through the fog of tiny design differences 😁

Frenchlover

Sure they are not varieties, so they should have separate lines:

- 20 Senti 1981

- 20 senti 1981 (minted in 2012)

Drawings would explain design differences to guide the collector and I'm sure you are keen to guide collectors through the fog of tiny design differences 😁

I don't need to. It's all in the years, and it doesn't matter when they were minted🤭

natbaj

…
2002 and 2005 coins are magnetic (Ni plated Fe). But they have slightly different desing (most noticable on 10s piece by two branches of banana that point at A and L or between A and L. Your piece has the same reverse as 2005. Old 1981 coins have the older rev. 

It's similar to supplementary coinage of 20 and 50 seniti which are a bit different than originals anyway, but they are not the new alloy, rather the old one. 
…

The design change for 10 Seneti appened on 2005, 2002 is similar to previous years.

As you said the two left branchs don't point to the same direction

design from 2005

1981 design

But I don't see any difference for 20 Seniti and 50 Seniti.

What slight difference do you see ?

Comparison between 20 Seniti (1981-1996) and 20 Sentini 2011: [edit: I don't show 1981 nor 1996 which is a pivot year] [edit: see next answer]

50 Seniti 1981-1996 :  [edit: I don't show 1981 nor 1996 which is a pivot year] 

50 Seniti 2011

“TONGA” looks larger on 2011 coins, so we might find 20 Seniti and 50 Seniti 1981 coin with large “TONGA” …

the variant 1996:

For the 10 seniti from 1981, have your fun and supply me with the two different designs for the other years, if existing…..

Sjoelund

For the 10 seniti from 1981, have your fun and supply me with the two different designs for the other years, if existing…..

 

The coin produced on 2012 was magnetic KM#69a.

For 20 Seniti, in addition to the bold date ?, it seems there other tiny variations but difficult to describe (the head a little thinner ?):

[edit: see next answer]

For 20 Seniti, in addition to the bold date ?, it seems there other tiny variations but difficult to describe (the head a little thinner ?):

[edit: see next answer]

Je me sens comme un bahu. 

Sjoelund

Je me sens comme un bahu. 

Then your drawing is very interesting in addition to the magnetism, just change the reference of the coin issued on 2012

Frenchlover

Sjoelund

For the 10 seniti from 1981, have your fun and supply me with the two different designs for the other years, if existing…..

 

The coin produced on 2012 was magnetic KM#69a.

So you need this?

Can't you align the coins before showing off? Align = exactly the same axes, no deviations allowed! So please align the 20 seniti coins before anything……

Frenchlover

For 20 Seniti, in addition to the bold date ?, it seems there other tiny variations but difficult to describe (the head a little thinner ?):

 

So which coin was minted in 2012 (design 2005), quite important to know if you set up a documentation, wouldn't you agree? Please align, it's not difficult, just time-consuming!

Sjoelund

 

Your correction is interesting because I expected to see the reference KM#69a for the coin produced in 2012 that was magnetic.
But you rightly do not mention the reference KM#69a and it reminds me of a rule of Xavier who said "do not create references KM# even if it seems appropriate to you". Other coin collector sites list this coin as a new entry.

So where should we place this coin produced in 2012 in the Numista catalogue? A new line 1981 with the KM#69 page or with KM#69a ? 🤔

Same km#, but two year lines, one with the 

not magnetic “minted in 1981”; see comments

 and the other

magnetic “minted in 2012”; see comments

what else?

In the comments section, you just add my graphic and the thing is settled?

Comparison between 20 Seniti (1981-1996) and 20 Sentini 2011. I don't show 1981 nor 1996 which is a pivot year

We now know that Australia took over production of the coins from perfidious Albion in 1996 and we can see that the President's face has seriously grown bigger. The date and characters look bolder on 2011 and the three yams (Dioscorea) might also be bigger ?

So the deal is to compare two 20 Seneti coins (with the same alignment …) expecting than one was produced on 1981 and the other on 2012

So this coin may have been produced on 1981

And this one on 2012

When superposing with the help of the free tool “Gif Creator”, that gives:

Sorry, I think, that's light effects, the bust in my opinion the two sides are equal. Your problem is the diameter of your coins, which are NOT exactly the same (difficult to assure, I know from experience!!!)😊

@Frenchlover the difference is a bit more obvious in width and font of Tonga inscription. The depth is different and whole impression is different - I was comparing a lot when I saw new KM# was assigned to supplementary issues of 2011. 

2002 and 2005 are mostly separated for that reason. 1 cent is the smallest difference. 2 cents - I guess 2005 does not exist. 5 cents has wider chicken and mound it's standing on goes from rim to rim. 10 cents discussed here, 20 and 50 cents have wider inscriptions, generally larger details on the portrait.

I agree these two 1981 are lighting

To summarize, the 10 Seniti were first produced by Australia from 1981 to 1996 then produced by England in 1996 and 2002 with a slight difference, then a big change on the reverse in 2005 and this last design of the English reverse of 2005 was used by Australia to reproduce coins in 2012 dated 1981.

Comparing my 20 Seniti coins 1981 and 2002 with the same zoom and the same number of pixels, I get:

Edge is thinner for 2002 and portrait looks bigger. 

So a restrike from 2012 might look like my 2002 coin.

First of all, sorry for my late reaction as referee of Samoa.

For the 10 Seniti KM# 69 - KM# 69a:

I assume everyone can agree there are two different 1981 coins, the one struck in 1981 (KM# 69) and the one struck in 2012 but with date 1981 (KM# 69a).

They are very easy to distinguish:

- The 1981 KM# 69 is non-magnetic (struck in copper-nickel), the 1981 KM# 69a is magnetic (struck in nickel plated steel).

- Because of the difference in composition, there's also a difference in weight: the 1981 KM# 69 weighs 5.65 g, the 1981 KM# 69a weighs 4.80 g.

- The 1981 KM# 69 has the old design, the 1981 KM# 69a has the same design as the 2005. You can see the difference in design on Ole's documentation. The design difference is easiest to spot on the lower left branch of the banana plant which points to the last leg of the A on the 1981 KM# 69 and to the first leg of the A on the 1981 KM# 69a. Also easy to see is the text length on the reverse. The text on the 1981 KM# 69 starts halfway the trunk of the tree, on the 1981 KM# 69a it starts about the start of the first left branch.

At first I thought Ole's documentation was not completely correct because the obverse of the second coin is not completely in an upright position, look at the shoulders (green line). So the measurements of the bust are not completely correct. I thought it would be less and negligible, but it turns out after correction of the upright position the difference is even bigger:

Nevertheless, there are much easier ways to spot the difference besides the size of the bust.

Frenchlover

 

But you rightly do not mention the reference KM#69a and it reminds me of a rule of Xavier who said "do not create references KM# even if it seems appropriate to you". 

I disagree. We don't create a new reference KM# since the KM# 69a already exists. So Ole, I suggest you change the title of your documentation to: "Tonga, 10 seniti 1981, KM# 69 - KM# 69a.

A new year line for 1981 will be added to the  KM# 69a.

Is this OK? I straightened the 69a, thanks.

Great, I'll add it this evening when I come back. Or you can make a change request.

I'll leave it to you,

Take care

Some_Nerd

Ah, I see what happened. I added the comment to KM#69 based on the 2012 Royal Australian Mint annual report, assuming the 1981-dated coins were the same composition. I now see that an additional year should be added to the KM#69a page. I will make the modification requests now.

From numismaster km69a IS now an official km#

Would it be possible to make the year lines for the km69a appear like this, which seems more logical (1981 before 2005!) to me?

When there is a significant difference between the year listed and the year of mintage, the mintage year is listed in parenthesis for statistics sake. The current listing of the yearlines is correct.

That's really a matter of opinion, who will look for a coin with the year 1981 WRITTEN on it behind later years? Numista is not logic at all.