Rob

He didn't get that message in time it seems. But equally, we should perhaps avoid "quoting" a post that includes the same information? (I've fallen into that trap too ). Happier?

on its way. You might like to remove your address from public view to avoid spammers. Send a PM or email next time to save giving out the info.

PM me your email address and I'll send a larger greyscale image to you rather than the black and white.

It is in focus. I rested it on the scanner bed. i.e. I can't do better.

Looks ok, but only you can say if it is a true representation of the colours.

This is what you are asking for. Personally, I would use the Nightingale sale catalogue which also has this list, but with an extra added. I have also found a previously unlisted reverse die paired with obv.G, but that assumes the lists don't contain a misprunt and that I have not missed a blocked die. I haven't had time to confirm this..

I thought the same. In the end I forgot to bid anyway.

That's two errors.

Mmmmm.

So, 20 slabs of MS67s per box, 3 boxes available. I hope someone isn't trying to charge a premium for these things because that's a lot of coins to shift. I guess this is where it helps to have people who collect by number and who couldn't care less about the contents.

Have you got a spare one, Rob? Edit: if Nicholas didn't want any spares first, that is! No, but might have soon. Waiting for a list of books and catalogues off someone and it's the sort of thing he would have.

The Lingford catalogue doesn't list the relative rarities of the dies, but Tun is a very rare mark for 1551 because it only appears on obverse Z. The vast majority dated 1551 are obverse A with a few other dies appearing - B, C, E, F, G, J & K. all of these are relatively rare. 1552 & 1553 have 2 dies per year. It's a need to get catalogue for reference purposes.

Make sure you keep all your receipts. As a collector of the eclectic, many things I own don't even feature in Spink - 50 odd G3 pattern halfpennies excluding 1799, 1806 & 1807 for example. Left to the insurance loss adjuster, these wouldn't even exist in his eyes.

Oh, my God, you're ALL at it! Even Rob with his C1 halfcrown micro-varieties, if I remember rightly! I only ever recall Richard in denial of this micro-disease! Once I have the entire G5 set, I too will likely seek out the micros, and add the occasional proof coin as and when they appear! Having said that, I do have the flat AND hollow neck farthings! That's a means to an end because I'm looking for die sequences, and the the underlying erased detail holds the key.

Presumably you mean 28.24g? 38.24g is unquestionably not within limits.

Overpriced then Depends how much and where it has been. I can see that you might pay up to 13 or 1400 with a bit of research. It would have to drop some Rob as it's inbetween those 2 figures already Where is it, Heritage?

Overpriced then Depends how much and where it has been. I can see that you might pay up to 13 or 1400 with a bit of research.

A grand give or take a bit.

Does anyone know off the top of their head what our DG added to the Freeman and Davies catalogue? Just out of interest, Steve, do you also draw the line at the F numbers, or do you fish out the extra Gouby's and Groom's? 1959 1/S 1944 1d 1918 farthings 1915/16 recessed ears 1912 halfpennies 1911 6d 1911 1d 1911 halfpennies 1911 farthings 1906 1/- 1904 1/- 1903 1/- off the top of my head (kinda). Sorry if I missed any, Dave!

And reverse. The RM suggested it was a Burundi 10Fr flan based on diameter and weight, which means it was actually struck in 1968, not 1967. As you can see, the detail is slightly weak at the periphery and on the high points, but normal size as a footprint.

So there's alleged, IF and WERE.... still opinion from supposition. I'll really have to ask my mechanic next door neighbour to get me some of that battery acid. Watch this space. No one has commented on my suggestion of the possibility of weak and/or uneven strikes due to thin flans caused by the use of over-pressed-too-thin sheets of metal. Is that idea impossible? Numquam credere peritus It isn't impossible, but would require the diameter to be of the correct size so that the blank was held securely in the collar. The slightest variation in diameter and you get a noticeable mistrike. This happens when a blank of similar, but not identical dimensions gets thrown into the hopper with the correct blanks. An example is this 1967 florin which weighs 7.78g instead of 11.30g, has only a bare trace of edge milling and is obviously off-centre. Obverse:

I don't think a weak strike would apply because the shape of the letters is all wrong. With a weak strike you get the detail with a full footprint, but in unusually low relief. This means no fine hair detail for example because the metal wasn't sufficiently forced up to fill the finer voids. The coins struck during WW1 and WW2 do show this characteristic as an attempt was made to extend the life of the dies. Another date which is notoriously weak is 1920 and also 1921 following the change from 925 to 500 silver. I stick with my original assessment because the legend on any GV penny or halfpenny is flat topped and yet yours has a nicely bevelled high relief verging on the sharp. That is the point which immediately stood out, coupled with the 'moat' surrounding each character.

There are more out there than you realise, but then there are a lot more collectors than just those that frequent the forum as has been discussed previously. I would say I probably encounter about one new variety collector a month at the Midland, which when you consider the limited number of people you meet in the few hours available is quite a lot. There may well be more, but as the stock response is 'Just browsing', I don't know what they collect and to what level.

The Grading book is a completely different beast to Groom. It shows you how the various types wear down through the grades. If not familiar, it is invaluable. Groom is a reference book which lists the various types seen in what ever year, including varieties. One book is for silver and the other base metal. The 1558-1958 book is Peck and will set you back over £100, being last printed in 1970. Depending on what you want to collect, it may or may not be appropriate. If you collect before 1860 then you need it, but if only later than this then you don't. Freeman which covers bronze from 1860 onwards, was reprinted in 2006, but has the same variety information as the 1985 (2nd) edition as only the pricing was updated - leading to immediate irrelevance.

Sumus omnes in stercore That was our class motto.