Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

Australia Silver Kookaburras


Recommended Posts

I don't have the complete set, so I will add them as I aquire them. Basically this is the Australian silver bullion coin. Learn more about the Kookaburra here: Wiki

 

Each year the reverse design is different. These are the only bullion coins that change every year. They are legal tender.

 

894192.jpg

 

895975.jpg

 

896982.jpg

 

907617.jpg

 

896981.jpg

 

894191.jpg

 

901455.jpg

 

908231.jpg

 

898136.jpg

 

900439.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice coins. I think that it's interesting that they change the design every year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

So they change the design each year... but the subject of the design is always this Kookaburra Bird?

 

Very interesting.

 

Also when used as legal tender do they count as face value or silver value?

 

-Bobby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is some of the list of Kookaburras: http://www.pandaamerica.com/subcategory.as...&categ=19&grp=1

 

It seems that recent years, the 10 ounce Kookaburras are completely off the theme of it, but it is still considered as part of the Kookaburra set...

 

Also note that there are quite a few versions of such Kookaburras but they only vary at the Privy marks. Some might consider them fancy because it might depict for what purpose the coins were minted for. It might prove to be difficult to collect every single privy mark that exist, as that is like trying to collect every single silver dollar by different mints.

 

Fortunately, such coins are not toooooooooooooooo expensive. :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

I've got a few dates for these. They are really really beautiful coins.

 

Tiff.....I don't have an up to date KM (modern coins aren't really my thing), so I don't know what is what with these issues. However, I noticed that your coin dated 1996 is the same as one I have...excepting that my one is dated 1995 (?). I also have another for 1995 although different design. Always did mean to get to the bottom of that but never did.

 

Were there two different issues for 1995 ? Is there a static design for each year as well as a unique design for each year? I figured there was perhaps a bullion coin running alongside the collectors coin or something like that .

 

PS I also have a 1999 which you might not have. Want a scan?

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm having a hard time finding reference to your extra anywhere.

 

Not sure if you mean the Krause, but in the 2006 ths 1st is KM#260 and the second is KM#289.1 Interestingly the top one is listed as a proof only with the date 1994. Could be that Krause has mistakenly reversed the placement listing of proof and unc for the year 1995. (The 1995 proof listing should be for KM#260 and the 1995 Unc should be for KM289.1) Not sure though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dug out my 1999 copy of KM . In it the $1 series `Australian Kookaburra' (An Aussie Kook?) starts with KM 164 in 1992, but there's also KM209 `Kookaburra Feeding Nestling' (Kooky Times?) dated 1992.

 

In 1993 we have THREE different designs. The same two from the previous year and a new one, 212.1 `Pair of Kookaburras' (Just a Couple of Kooks?).

 

In 1994 we have two designs. KM212.1 again and a new design KM260 `Kookaburra on Branch' (Kook on a Stick to Go?)

 

In 1995 we have two designs. KM260 again and a new design KM289.1 `Kookaburra in Flight' (as used in the aboriginal game of darts?).

 

In 1996 the KM289.1 design was issued again.....and there my KM's referencing ends. :ninja:

 

Presumably there being at least two different designs each year, this trend has been maintained to present time (?). Can anyone with a more up to date KM than me confirm?

 

Ah well, nothing untowards with the two different types I have for 1995 then. At least, my 1995 flying Kook is noted as a `proof' with a mintage of only 4,900.

Maybe one day it'll be worth more than the $2 over the 1996 that KM notes ;). Then again maybe not. Maybe KM will issue a correction that the figure was really 4,900,000. Now THAT would be more in keeping with my luck of late.

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites
...

Ah well, nothing untowards with the two different types I have for 1995 then.  At least, my 1995 flying Kook is noted as a `proof' with a mintage of only 4,900.

Maybe one day it'll be worth more than the $2 over the 1996 that KM notes :ninja:. Then again maybe not. Maybe KM will issue a correction that the figure was really 4,900,000. Now THAT would be more in keeping with my luck of late.

 

Ian

 

 

I am not familiar with this series at all so I am merely hypothesizing here, but comparing the field and devices of your 1995 "Kookaburra in flight" with Tiff's 1996, I am tempted to say that yours would be the BU version and her's the proof. (Thus my reason for thinking there is a mistake in the Krause.)

 

My Krause also lists a KM#701 dollar in this series but shows no photo. I wonder if that is the coin that Tiff has??

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not familiar with this series at all so I am merely hypothesizing here, but comparing the field and devices of your 1995 "Kookaburra in flight" with Tiff's 1996, I am tempted to say that yours would be the BU version and her's the proof. (Thus my reason for thinking there is a mistake in the Krause.)

 

My Krause also lists a KM#701 dollar in this series but shows no photo. I wonder if that is the coin that Tiff has??

 

That 1995 flying kook of mine is very definitely a proof coin. Heavily frosted devices in very deep mirror finished fields. Don't be put off by the occasional flecks. They are marks on the glass of the scanner.

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites
That 1995 flying kook of mine is very definitely a proof coin. Heavily frosted devices in  very deep mirror finished fields.  Don't be put off by the occasional flecks. They are marks on the glass of the scanner. 

 

Ian

 

 

I figured it was a proof. ;) I was just hoping to explain away why one has mirror-like fields and is proof, and the other has a frosted field yet is still a proof. :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I figured it was a proof. ;)  I was just hoping to explain away why one has mirror-like fields and is proof, and the other has a frosted field yet is still a proof. :ninja:

there's another difference:

 

901455.jpg

1995Akook.jpg

 

 

notice the "P" above the tail feathers?

 

My krause (2005) says:

 

KM# 289.1

 

1995P Proof, mintage 4,900, value $20.00

1996 mintage 300,000, value in UNC $18

Link to post
Share on other sites
I always thought mine were the Uncs.

 

They are probably best described as `proof like'. The frosted surfaces achieved are amazing though, and produce some amazing colourations when they tone.

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites
there's another difference:

 

notice the "P" above the tail feathers?

 

My krause (2005) says:

 

KM# 289.1

 

1995P Proof, mintage 4,900, value $20.00

1996 mintage 300,000, value in UNC $18

 

The key difference is noticeable when you have the two types in hand. The mirror finish on the proof is in the fields and the devices are frosted. The `proof likes' are frosted fields but the devices have a polished look to them rather than the deep mirror effect produced with the proof strike.

 

Different die finishes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...