Martinminerva

Perfectly normal. As Secret Santa said in your other posting, for the years 1861 to 1866 especially, there are all sorts of date widths. This 1864 is a scarcer date and has the crosslet 4 which is a bit scarcer again than the serif 4, but the lowly condition of this piece means it has very little collectors value - perhaps 2 or 3 pounds absolute max. Don't spend it all at once!

Would need to see a picture. An awful lot of so called "thin flan" 20thC coinage is post mint damage/tampering as the coins have been submerged in acid either deliberately or else in acidic soil conditions before being discovered as detector finds. I myself have unearthed many such pieces. The giveaway signs are that the surfaces are mottled, stippled or porous where the acid has eaten away constituent parts of the metal alloy. If the surfaces are anything different from a normal circulation piece, then I would fear that is what you have...

Silver is doing well for scrap price at the moment on the back of gold, so this sixpence would scrap at between £1.00 and £1.20. Don't spend it all at once!! It has no extra numismatic value in this lowly condition.

Yes - definitely a lamination fault caused by gas bubble trapped in the original molten metal mix.

If you could, please! Newbie suggests a little greenness or inexperience, I fear...

Yes - a circumferential die crack. The tops of letters were particularly vulnerable points for this. The other type of die crack is called radial which emanate outwards like "spokes"

Me too! All seems to be ok - and this'll be my test post just to see if things work with a random coin picture too. If all is good, jolly well done, Chris !!

Not a penny as it is dated. Can't determine denomination without other measurements ideally weight, but certainly diameter.

Yes, definitely a penny. Both three half pence and three farthings would be dated.

Perfectly legit.

I must say I have to agree with Coinery - whilst there were many high quality contemporary forgeries, it really does look pretty genuine; don't know offhand what a correct weight should be, though... One other possibility is that it is actually genuine and that some foreign matter got mixed into the molten silver when the blanks were made and it is this that has subsequently made the missing sliver of surface silver fall off during its life, a bit like a lamination flaw. To be absolutely definitive, it would need to be seen in the flesh by someone competent.

A very good quality silver plated/clad forgery, unfortunately. The area of damage is where the silver surface has been broken away, revealing the base metal (a copper alloy) underneath.

Good very fine.

Can you post a link, Bob?

Flan lamination flaw, yes, but double strike no - you mean instead clashed dies, thus imparting part of Viccy's face to the reverse die and then all subsequently struck coins. And the vertical bit by her nose is a corresponding clash from the edge of the shield on the reverse. I suspect the misformed G is also the result of the clash with whatever letter from the reverse legend corresponds with it. All interesting, but nothing really abnormal or a genuine error here as die clashes are very common in the Victorian series and lamination occurs as a result of trapped gas bubbles in the metal mix for the blanks.