Peckris

now there was a man who knew the meaning of Shock and Awe ..for which the Japanese are still paying

Can't see why not. At least it's a missing colon - or die wear and not some silly random dot somewhere. Good spot by the way. The missing one, you mean?

My guess is no. The colon dots are notoriously variable and often indistinct on the entire copper series - as so often, is the legend lettering. Even an obsessive would be put off by trying to complete a set of copper with every possible colon dot gradation! An almost infinite series.

It's the same with vinyl records. And no doubt ANYTHING is collectable.

Not to me! (panicked look...)

Not rare at all, but it's a very popular and very nice set. What's more, it's the only issued proof set for the Elizabeth II second type (i.e. post-1953). Well worth adding to a collection - it would be my Number One of the modern proof sets, with 1971 (first decimal set) and 1972 (proof-only year) my #2 and #3.

That was'nt insultive hello17, the man in question is the sort of type new collectors like you need to avoid, and my few words there were not harsh enough, trust me, never buy from this man on ebay when you're old enough to start paying taxes. i have rarely trusted ebay ... i just wait by staring at my penias

I think I would love one of those! My own favourite ancient is a tiny Ephesos bronze - one one side (obverse? reverse?) there is a quite exquisite depiction of a bee (from above) and on the other, an equally exquisite depiction of a stag. And all on a coin the size of a quarter farthing.

Do you think it's called Penny?

Ha ha, I foresee a few rabbits going into saucepans of boiling water

it's their spam, not there spam Maybe thems do lones until payday. LOL, and remember folks - it's LOSE not LOOSE

Your post so good they named it twice ... er, FOUR times ?

It's actually just the right size Fits neatly into a tabbed browser with bookmarks bar on a 17" screen, which just by coincidence... (By the way, you mean Photoshop not Photobucket, the latter is a picture hosting site!) For f***'s sake don't encourage him!

I think the first two are the funniest! (Cameltoe and phlegmball )

Dave, I've been studying your picture quite closely, alongside just.me's uploaded images. What seems to be the case is that the bust on yours is the same position as on those others. It just LOOKS lower because it is very very weak (whether from the die, or just on that particular coin, it's really not possible to say) at the base of the bust where the WW would be. But, looking at the base of the bust both to the left and right of that area where it's less weak, it appears to be the same height as those others. However, it is very difficult to determine with absolute precision without overlaying the images in different colours one over the other.

Yes, that's another of the differences. Also there are a few minor differences in the ribbon immediately above the date (no fold on the left, thicker strand on the right). I'm impressed by your knowledge of Hocking! I can see myself getting around to asking them in around two years time LOL.

That's my whole point Rob. It's NOT a "minute difference". It's a bloody huge glaring "twice as big as normal" spacing. And I'm not one of your perpetual hopefuls ("Oh I'll post it at predecimal and show everyone that yet again I've got a massive rarity and soon I'll be famous"). I've STUDIED as many of those wreath reverse 1887 JH heads as I can lay my hands on, or through enlargements on eBay, and I can assure you, the spacing of that issue is pretty standard. Except for this one. I do not buy the "there are variations all over Victoria's reign" - not after the early 80s when the methods of production changed and as we all know from the bun penny (and all other) output from then on, there is a remarkable consistency compared to what went before. Anyway, that wasn't my main point. My main point was and is - all other varieties here cause an outburst of interest, enthusiasm and back-slapping congratulations. I don't see why my poor sixpence can't elicit a fraction of that instead of the wet blanket treatment.

I would of never thought of using the Hubble telescope. Now you're just being unfair. If you "Enlarge" it, it's quite obvious there is a hole near the top of the ... ?coin?

Hi - it's on this page http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showforum=44 - about halfway down It's a sure-fire unrecorded variety Dave - the 8 over 8 is clear as daylight, and the wide space between the 8 and the 7 is clearer still. It can't possibly be a 'smudge' or a 'worn die' or anything like that. That's why I'm so miffed. It's so clear and so obvious. I did get some interest from our friend 1887 who agrees it's unrecorded and wanted to put it in his book, though it's all gone quiet on that front. One of you guys who's friendly with Davies could do me a favour and point him towards the discussion pages, if you felt like it?

Well, I have NEVER seen another 1887 "8/8" "8 7" sixpence, so unless I can get Spinks interested then despite its rarity it's a worthless piece of crap that no-one is bothered with. Amazing how every other unrecorded variety posted in these forums has everyone in orgasms.

In other words, only "one between two" for every inhabitant of Britain. Oh dear, a lot of people are going to go without. I won't deny you Peck.You can have my half I won't hear of such unselfishness Peter - I insist that you have it

My 1887 wreath reverse sixpence variety is a lot more of a sure-fire observably different coin compared to the regular issue than yours appears to be Dave. Yet how much interest has it aroused in this forum? Almost none. Sorry if I'm unsympathetic, but that's been my experience. Sour grapes? You bet.

In other words, only "one between two" for every inhabitant of Britain. Oh dear, a lot of people are going to go without.

ROFL. "Only" ???

What do you want to know? History? Value? Grade? Pictures would be necessary if either of the last two are required. Ok i will try and take some pics and attatch them i want to know everything The 1807 is probably a halfpenny (new collectors often assume they are pennies as they are quite large). The value of them ranges from about £1 in worn condition, up to near £100 for a really top grade specimen. George III issued halfpennies and farthings in the 1770s, then stopped, and there was a dire shortage of small change. Tokens (mostly halfpennies) filled the gap and are a specialist field all to themselves. Then Matthew Boulton got together with James Watt (yes THE J.W.) to produce steam equipment for automating coin production and got a contract to produce copper twopences and pennies dated 1797 (the so-called "Cartwheels" due to their size). Then the value of copper rose so the coins got smaller as they had to contain their own weight in copper - halfpennies and farthings were issued in 1799. Then slightly smaller again, and in 1806-7 pennies halfpennies and farthings were issued, which were the last coppers of George III. There was a huge redesign of the coinage in 1816, which didn't include copper. However, from 1816 it was decreed for the first time that coins didn't have to contain their own face value of the metal used, which is how it's been ever since. The other coins you have are unremarkable predecimal 20th Century issues, unlikely to be worth anything much. The halfpenny would be worth something in really top condition, the 1944 halfcrown contains real silver (50%) so has an intrinsic value, and the 1965 is worth about £5 but only if in absolute gleaming mint condition.