Gary D

How do I edit a post once it has been posted. On a couple of occassions I've noticed a typing errors but have been unable to correct them.

I have a 1956 half penny with Obv 4 (D to bead gap) and L of Half to bead rev D. Micheal Coins rates it as scarce. Condition is probably Good fine to very fine. Does anyone know what constitutes scare and a ball-park value. Gary

Does it exist? as I think I've got one. I know there is the polished die version but this one is similar in appearance to the 1953 proof. Gary

If it is a polished die I can live with that. It only cost $17 from the States Of course it does mean that 99.9% of the ones that purport to be polished dies on ebay are not.

Last one,

And again,

Here it is, looks as though I need to get a better 53 proof as well

In which case it probably isn't a proof. ESC393M has a rarity of R4 (est. 11-20 examples) and specifically says frosted design and highly polished fields. The frosted design will be the key as without proof-like and proof of the same design side by side it is likely to be difficult to tell unless you know what to look for and there was a similar thread a few months ago on this general topic involving a George VI proof (?). Ok I'm home now and can compare it with my other crowns. If you are talking about a VIP its not, well nothing like the 1937 VIP I had for a brief time. I likened it to the 1951 because the head is brighter than the 1953 proof which is mildly frosted but apart from that it looks a proof with mirrored fields. I have what I thought was a polished die, at least thats what I paid for. But not having something to compare it with I could easily be wrong. Its very clean but not mirrored on the fields. I will try and get a scan to post later tonite if I can get it to look realisist in the lights. Gary

I thought I knew what a polished die version looked like but I could be wrong. This is more like the finish on the 1951 proof like.

Yes I'm just SE of Cambridge.

Am I getting bad vibes coming over about Lockdales. I need to get my collection valued for insurence purposes and was considdering Lockdales as they are the only people I am aware of local to me. Does anyone have any other recommendations, preferably some one who over grades and over prices emmm back too Lockdales then.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Queen-Elizabeth-II-1...1QQcmdZViewItem

"Obv. 3 D of DEI to gap [Thin rim] Obv. 4 D of DEI to bead [Thicker rim]" Makes it so much easier than trying to measure 0.15mm difference with a verier and not scratch anything. This still makes my 1970 a wide. I'll now go away and pester everyone on ebay for a picture of the obverse of there 1970 1/2d Unless anyone has got a spare thin rim kicking around.

Just tell me when you get bored. I think I have got to the bottom of this normal/wide lark. It is the head that shows the difference and I was comparing obverse, doh, well its got the date on. On the head side I measured 0.45mm for normal and 0.6mm for wide. So where do you measure the dimensions of the ship.

The plot thickens. I thought I had both the wide and normal rim 1967 1/2d. On closer inspection the wide rim I purchased is the same as the what I considered to be a normal. So do I have 2 normals or 2 wides. Comparing them too my other 60s 1/2d I'd say they are both normal rims. Looking at my 1970 proof side by side it has a narrower rim so it begs the question " Is there such a thing as a wide rim 1967 1/2d". What we should be looking for is actually a narrow rim.

I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean, but if I am on the right lines then yes, the 1970 Proof Halfpenny (from the issued sets) has this wide rim variation. I think it is also the same that the wider rim is scarcer than the normal rim type. I meant bearing 1967, so are you saying that the 1970 proof 1/2d came in both wider and normal rims if so I have the wider rim 1970. Now to start looking for a normal rim. What about the other 1967 demoninations, are there variations. I'm quickly coming to the conclusion that spink's is pretty limited, especially given to amount of unlisted proofs that keep popping up. Is there a better guide to variations.

Are any of the other post 1967 coins distinguishable from the 1967 variety as with the 1/2d Gary

I,m looks for both the 1977 and 1980 specimen crowns. Spink quotes "Specimen in presentation folder" What am I looking for? I have the 1981 which comes in a cardboard fold out about 4"x6" . Are the two I'm looking for similar? Gary

Yes, I suppose the specimens are the same as the currency but weren't they the first few off the new dies which were then carefully handled and sold as a higher grade than the later currencies like the 1935 specimen. I'm just trying to fill the last few gaps in my run of crowns. I've got everything from 1900 to 1981 the last 5/- apart from the VIPs and Matts, too many matts around lataly mmmm. The only other one which I need to tie down is the 1960. I purchased an exhibition piece recently only to find when I got it home that it is identicle to the one I already had, so now I'm not sure, perhaps my original is an exhibition also lol.

Rightl, logged in now, that's better. Just to clarify, according to spink there are for the 4 E11 crowns. 1972 Currency Proof is set Silver Proof 1977 Currency Specimen in presentation folder Proof in set Silver proof 1980 Currency Specimen in presentation folder Silver proof 1981 Currency Specimen in presentation folder Silver proof. The 1981 specimen is quite distinguishable from the currency and I was hoping this held for the 1977 and 1980 specimens. Sort of proof like at least

Hi, Could someone please tell me what to look for with the two types of 1920 2/6 ie deep cut and shallow. Many thanks Gary

How about adding the pictures and discriptions of the listed difference also, such as the shallow and deep cut 1920, double exergue line, 1946 penny 'One' die flaw??? etc.

Having dusted down my collection it is starting to look as thought there might be a few pounds worth there. This has promted me to think that perhaps I should look into a drop of insurance . Any ideas, suggestions etc on this topic.Regards Gary D

Met Dan today at Lockdales in Cambridge. He brought along one he had bought the day before. Mine is the real thing but his you needed sun glasses to look at it.

I had a chat with Dan at Lockdales today who suggested taking it along for him to have a look. The seller is offering to take it back but I obviously hope it turns out to be genuin.