Switzerland #86 I Think?

Having some issues with this one,
The Perforations I'm reading (double, triple checked with different gauges) but I ain't the greatest at using the gauge
Is 11.25 x 12
So I thought #96a nope 1901-03
This stamp was cancelled in 95
So it would have to be a #86 11.5 perf?
Can't make out the "watermark" impression (type 1 or 2?)

Your correct .

How am I getting a perforation of 12 Top and bottom?
11.5 doesn't seem to fit
Is it just a matter of rounding to the closest(it happens)




11.5

I have a old Scott saying 11 1/2
And stamp collecting world lists it as 11 3/4



11 3/4 fits much better :)

Try to align the black dots of your gauge with the perforation holes, not the tips.

Like this?

Try to watch the explanation in the link above how to use a perforation gauge correctly


Peter

mallard drop
My kids love watching his videos
(I check several different ways) just not sure what is best to post for explanation

Perf 11-3/4 all around is correct for the issue mentioned and is what is used by the Swiss catalogs like Zumstein. Scott rounds the number probably because most gauges (still) don't have measurements to the nearest quarter.

For the Standing Helvetias, it is important to check the watermark and perf again after the first evaluation. It is also good practice to measure perfs on all four sides since the stamps do get reperfed and you could be using a measurement of a reperfed side.

Don't know how to show it,
but best I get on the sides are between 11- 11.1/4
I just figured the paper shrunk :)
Both left and right are the same.
This is 11 not a perfect fit
(not a 11 3/4) my gauge doesn't have dots for this measurement or 11 1/4

For the watermark
At first no clue.



Now still no clue :) but Best guess I got type 2?


The F and G of the cancellation where obstructing the impression
But I think I found a corner to go on

Looks like a Type I watermark to me, Scott 86.

I have type 1 as being thicker and shorter?
(No argument here)



Here's a close up perhaps you can see the angle I found just below the G

Looks like a type I to me:


The wider spacing of the oval frame lines already says this is type I. You need to compare several stamps of the era to differentiate the two watermark types clearly.

I concede, two way more experienced agree type 1 watermark.
Now for the perforations my original issue
re-perforated?
Or do I need to work more on my gauging :)

Scott isn't the best reference for Swiss material, but they call the perforation for #86 as "11½ to 11¾", not 11½ x 11¾.