Thoughts? What does everybody use? Why?
I have a Johnson Kennedy 64 ] but I am about to order a set from Jamie Schoolcraft in Walking Liberty. Does the size difference matter? I have bigger hands, am I going to miss the size on a milled set?

Is the distortion of the expanded ] really noticeable. It doesn’t bother me on my 64s.

Also can anybody PM me on the kind and number of ]s I’d need to do Dean Dill’s Explosion from his Intimate Coin Miracles video.
Thanks for the help guys,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I have recently bought Jamies "Dean Dill re-milled Liberty set" and to answer your questions. The coins once remilled do feel a fraction smaller and they are slightly lighter than the 64 kennedy but the advantages far out weigh this. The crisp re-edging makes classic palm an absolute breeze and edge grip work is a whole lot easier too. The ] on my set fits right over the whole depth of the coin to the point that the bottom edge even has a bevel...set down on the table there is nothing to distinguish it from the othe coins ( the amount of times if had to lift up several coins to find the shell )
The other advantage is the fit of the coins. All the coins in the set are re-milled to fit the ] so you don't get the problem of the oversized coins getting jammed in the gaff.
Looks wise the coins have zero distortion...I am definitely a convert from the standard expanded ones now.
May also be worth checking out the C/S gaffs too, jamie has recently come up with a way of making them sound like the coins they are supposed to be...none of that dull thud you normally associate with the gaff.
I would recommend reading Dan's review on the http://www.coinvanish.com site, he goes into a lot more detail than I have on Jamies work.
Can't help with the explosion thing I'm afraid. Speak to Jamie, great guy...may be able to assist. good luck with getting your coins

Frank, By the way this review is coming from someone with fairly big hands too. 26cm Handspan (10 1/4 inch) and from wrist to tip of first finger is 21cm. What you might call an advantage

I use a standard Johnson WL e], and several WL halves that I hand selected for size and fit. I use these on a regular basis. As far as functional goes, that impromptu set works well, looks ok, and sounds ok (with some conscious effort on my part). I migrated recently from Kennedy halves. What does all this have to do with a remilled set from Jamie, you may ask. 1. I think there are many advantages to working with WL's over Kennedys in general, the reduced talking noise being foremost. 2. I also work with unexpanded ]'s and shaved coins in the same context as I do the e] and standard coins, and sometimes, both types in a single routine. The size difference is nominal and virtually undetectable to the spectator. As far as palming goes, it takes about an hour to get comfortable with the minor changes in size.

Finally, as Chris said, the remilled edges on one of Jamie's or Todd's sets makes palming a breeze. I think you'll be very happy with your new WL set. since I switched to WL's, most of my Kennedys have been gathering dust on the shelf.

If you get a decent Expanded ], it is UNDETECTABLE. I have an ES Set from Lassen, and it is so undetectable, I get fooled by it at times. It is the highest quality gaff I have ever seen.

From an experienced magic worker regarding this coin set: "that is the best expanded ] set I have ever seen!"

I don't like the remilled sets too much....as they are not too compatible with any other coins.

Jamie Schoolcraft calls his milled insert & milled ] set "The Ultimate Dean Dill Re-Edged Set", and that has to say a lot. Roy Kueppers is making me a set done the same way, and I think he also sees this as the ultimate way to do it. Todd Lassen also has a lot of good things to say about re-milled coins, and about the UNEX]. They all also clearly claim that EX & UNEX have their own advantages, and that it's largely a matter of preference.

Personally, I selected the coins I wanted to work with, based upon familairity, size, the images on the coin, and many other factors, and I asked Roy Kueppers, a true master, to help guide me through the decision-making process. The final decision was mine, and it was right decsion because it meets my needs. In my opinion, the right ] set is the one that is right for your needs. This may mean you'll need more than one set. Roy couldn't have told what set was best, but he was able to help me determine the right set for me. I would imagine any of these fine fellas—Roy, Todd, Jamie— would be only too happy to help you make the right decsion.

Well, there's my "two-cents worth"!
Cheers from Toronto!
Dan.

I mostly use the ex. in a routine where it needs to fit any of several other halves. I'm sure a non-ex. would work just as well if the other halves were all milled down. Although it's not an issue for many, the additional expense of buying more milled down halves may be a big factor for some. I like the simple practicality of using regular halves, so the ex. is my tool of choice.

I've always found the appearance of the ex. ones to be excellent. I've seen many of them, and only noticed some slightly stretchy metal on the head-side ones, and then only on the cheaper brands. I always use tail-side Johnson's and I'm very happy with the way they look.

I actually used these when they were made by adding an extra rim around the edge rather than being stretched. The additional width of that added metal was fairly obvious to me, although I don't believe any spectator ever noticed. The ex. ones are pretty foolproof by comparison.

Greg