Victoria 2d Mauve (Perf 12.5) - Anyone Know The Cv?

Well done you!

when I quote a perf size I adopt catalogue sequence
top, side.
or top, side, bottom. if 3 dim are given

My mathematical solution would give the same perf at the bottom
because there are the same amount of teeth
along the top of the frame and the bottom frame.

Given Rod's perforation measurements, the original stamp would be classified as Perf 13.

Perf 13 is used to describe any of 5 perforation machines that were in use between 1864 & 1880. 3 single line cutters gauging 12.75 (or thereabouts) and 2 converted comb machines of the same gauge.

I mentioned a machine that was repaired in 1879 - I believe this the most likely candidate for your stamp. This comb perf machine was a conversion of a 12.75 single line machine. The comb was only a single vertical line with top & bottom pins the width of one stamp - so the sheet was fed in sideways, the pins perforated one side (lets say the left side if fed in right way up,) and the top & bottom of one column. The sheet was then fed in the width of one stamp, and again perforated just a single vertical line (this time it's the right side of the first vertical column and the left side of the second vertical column if you're following me) and the top & bottom... and so it went. So the distinction of this type of comb compared to a single line machine is not an easy one, as only one side will appear comb - as yours does on the left side.


This machine after the repair produced some stamps that appear to be compound, gauging around the 12.5 x up to 13.25. This matches what we see with your stamp. So I think we can say there's a fair probability it was this very machine that perforated your stamp. For the purpose of simple nomenclature, it's just called perf 13.


Hope my explanation isn't confusing.

Balf

Great job getting the gospel right from the preacher. If that small note gets put back in SG, think of all the future questions that will be answered . Persistance paid off again.

MmmmBalf, I'll have to try reading that again in the morning.

nitrolures, I think a note like that is indispensable for, apparently, perf 12.5 is normal. By omitting that note, the catalogue inadvertently gave the impression that finding stamps with perf 12.5 (or thereabouts) was not normal and possibly amounted to a major discovery!

could you all go easy on the eye candy, too much of a good thing is detrimental to my wallet, and it also makes my wife edgy and my kids like to eat at least once a day! (great stamps all) - jeff

a little, but fascinating
great knowledge there.
Thanks for posting

The pins on the machine would be set up in this fashion (not to scale of course )

. . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . .
.
etc

Single vertical line with the top and bottom the width of one stamp.

MmmmBalf, trying to see if I grasped your post about the Repaired Perf Machine.

Providing all the comb line-up holes, were lined up and square to the paper, and the paper was lined up to an exact spot, then all sheets 'would' have the same perf arrangement across the sheets. If not, differences where the first and last perf sat on any side varied between it's four sides, from that comb.

While trying to ID my odd stamp, I came upon this older thread. My first thought is that this is SG 189 since it is a Die II. My perf measurements, like the OP, appear to be 12.5 all around (leaning towards 12.6 in spots). The stamp dimensions are 19.3 x 23.7 as measured with a steel rule. Any ideas?