Y111 vs Y67 test

[4b2]

Given that you are from the US, you will have more chance of finding a match. Maybe 80% of their tests have been sold in the US.

I'm pretty sure their tests are grossly overpriced over what they could be - about $450, which is more than you can get a full genome tests for.

When deciding to upgrade a Y test, look at your closest matches, and see what time range they suggest you are related. If you have matches they think could be related in the more feasible genealogical period (1750-1950) then a big-Y test might give you some more useful details. Otherwise you might get about the same info with Y-111.

This issue with big-Y is you need the other person to have took the test, and there's maybe only 100,000 people who have taken them.

As mentioned above, you will likely have more luck with atDNA, by going through all your matches to about 30-40cM and shared matches. You will be able to account for some of your lines, then be left with other clusters of matches that you don't know where they fit in. I think someone has written an overview of how that's done. It takes quite a lot of time.

I upgraded from 67 to big-Y. I think previously with 67 they suggested some of my closest matches could be in the earlier genealogical window, c. 1650. But when I got the big-Y results, I found they gave my closest matches with the common ancestor born in the window 1300. Given that most of these tests are sold in the US, I don't have much hope of a particularly close match coming up. It's probably more likely Ancestry will start to offer them at a reasonable price and find a closer match that way.

I have a few Y-DNA tests and none of them provide anything genealogically useful. We'd need millions of tests, like with atDNA, for it to really be useful. But they are useful for being able to provide a paternal immigration route. You don't necessarily need big-Y for that. If you are from the US, and have no known line back to the UK or elsewhere, you can potentially get an idea of where in Europe they came from.

[John-76]

I want to thank everyone for all the contributed suggestions and information.  I'm forwarding all this info to my sister since she's taken the lead in this search.  She is, as I am, very determined to finally exhaust the search for our Great Grandfather. 

Thank you all very much!
John

[rsel]

John, also suggest to your sister to join the appropriate 'projects' on the FTDNA web site. Whilst the admins will suggest the BIG-Y, they are also very knowledgable on if if would actually be worth upgrading based on your current matches.
One thing to consider, is do you have any male offspring ? If not because of your age it may be worth considering the upgrade just to be sure thar you DNA sample is good, so that you don't loose the opportunity. Sorry of that's a bit morbid, but you see a lot of posts where people delayed testing relatives, and they then lost the chance.

Richard

[John-76]

Thanks Richard.  Not morbid at all.  I'm 83 and have many more years behind me than ahead.  Hopefully it'll be a few years before my ticket's punched, but ?? 
We have one son who is 52 and I plan to encourage him to take the YDNA test also. 
I believe my sis has done what you suggested, but I'll pass the idea along anyway.

Thanks very much for the ideas!
John

[Biggles50]

I am one of the best at spending other peoples money!

What I suggest is that each of your Siblings take an Ancestry DNA test.

If we assume that your Great Grandfather had children by other women then their offspring at the same generation as you and your siblings are likely to share 120cM with you and each of your siblings, but conversely the DNA shared could be in the range 10 - 324cM.  If you are lucky to get a high cM match that may make finding the GGF a bit easier and it will be cross checked by your siblings test results.

Now when your siblings test do be aware that there may be issues, voice of experience there as my DNA test results led me to find my Brother to be my Half Brother.

If the tests are OK and if you also have a Brother then he could take a yDNA test as well.

Yes, this is a lot of testing but how DNA is inherited is by a random process and as such you and you siblings will share your parents DNA, just different Segments and multiple sibling DNA tests can mean more of the Paternal Genome is mapped out via the test. 

Now what you can then do with the Ancestry tests of you and your siblings is to upload them into Gedmatch and combine them into a DNA Superkit, this in turn may lead to additional “DNA Cousins” being identified.

[BushInn1746]

I am one of the best at spending other peoples money!

Hello

Jolly good, seriously thinking of a YDNA Test for my Male lineage only.

Any recommendations, anyone?

I'm not interested in locality, e.g., share birthplace with people born on Gruinard off Scotland, nor 3% Irish 7% French, 200% English  rubbish.

Mark

[Biggles50]

I am one of the best at spending other peoples money!

Hello

Jolly good, seriously thinking of a YDNA Test for my Male lineage only.

Any recommendations, anyone?

I'm not interested in locality, e.g., share birthplace with people born on Gruinard off Scotland, nor 3% Irish 7% French, 200% English  rubbish.

Mark

ftDNA do a few options, the more thorough and detailed the higher the cost.

The 111 would be my suggestion as a starter, if the results are then OK you can then pay the upgrade fee for the Big 700 (no additional test is required) which will unlock all the additional available data.

Do set low expectations, the lack of any significant quantity of yDNA testers limits the usefulness of a yDNA test.

With a 111 yDNA test you get the closest matches listed under their markers 111, 67, 37, 25 & 12.

For me there are 3, 15, 4, 7 & 741 yDNA matches listed against each of those listed.

Of these the 3 at the 111 marker two have the surname of interest, these two also show under the other markers and of the surnames listed there is every permutation you can think of.  In other words it is not very useful.

Next with each match you get the likely generational distance before there is a MRCA which in the two quoted above is c1750 and c1700, the remainder go back centuries into the black hole of no records.

The other scrap of info that I got was my rough Haplogroup which goes back thousands of years, hence of zero genealogical interest.

My use was to confirm my ancestral surname which is different from the one on my birth certificate, the two yDNA matches quoted have that surname that is common among my atDNA matches.

There you are, my personal yDNA experiences.

Exhausting atDNA matches is IMO a better route, spread DNA data around as many sites as you can, this will max out the number of DNA matches that you have plus sites like Gedmatch and My Heritage have useful DNA analytical tools that Ancestry only has in very basic simple form.

Having kin take a DNA can also help to open doors and break down brick wall so do encourage them.

Ancestry seems to be having a promo at present, £59+p&p.

[BushInn1746]

ftDNA do a few options, the more thorough and detailed the higher the cost.

The 111 would be my suggestion as a starter, if the results are then OK you can then pay the upgrade fee for the Big 700 (no additional test is required) which will unlock all the additional available data.

Do set low expectations, the lack of any significant quantity of yDNA testers limits the usefulness of a yDNA test.

With a 111 yDNA test you get the closest matches listed under their markers 111, 67, 37, 25 & 12.

For me there are 3, 15, 4, 7 & 741 yDNA matches listed against each of those listed.

Of these the 3 at the 111 marker two have the surname of interest, these two also show under the other markers and of the surnames listed there is every permutation you can think of.  In other words it is not very useful.

Next with each match you get the likely generational distance before there is a MRCA which in the two quoted above is c1750 and c1700, the remainder go back centuries into the black hole of no records.

The other scrap of info that I got was my rough Haplogroup which goes back thousands of years, hence of zero genealogical interest.

My use was to confirm my ancestral surname which is different from the one on my birth certificate, the two yDNA matches quoted have that surname that is common among my atDNA matches.

There you are, my personal yDNA experiences.

Exhausting atDNA matches is IMO a better route, spread DNA data around as many sites as you can, this will max out the number of DNA matches that you have plus sites like Gedmatch and My Heritage have useful DNA analytical tools that Ancestry only has in very basic simple form.

Having kin take a DNA can also help to open doors and break down brick wall so do encourage them.

Ancestry seems to be having a promo at present, £59+p&p.

Hello

Thank you for your reply.

I was expecting zero, or one, or a few matches at best, from this type of test.

I have a documented line back to an ancestor, reputedly born Yorkshire, with Death Certificate and Burial records, giving a Birth latter part of the 18th century.

I would be looking for another Male line who branches off from his Father or before.

I have spent 30 years messing about with researching possibles (although I have some possibles) getting, Certificates, Wills, Property Registrations, Muster Rolls, Deeds, surviving School records and other documents etc.

I suppose a same surname result, with a high possibility is a pretty strong possible.

Thank you Mark

Edited

[Biggles50]

Hello

Thank you for your reply.

I was expecting zero, or one, or a few matches at best, from this type of test.

I have a documented line back to an ancestor, reputedly born Yorkshire, with Death Certificate and Burial records, giving a Birth latter part of the 18th century.

I would be looking for another Male line who branches off from his Father or before.

I have spent 30 years messing about with researching possibles (although I have some possibles) getting, Certificates, Wills, Property Registrations, Muster Rolls, Deeds, surviving School records and other documents etc.

I suppose a same surname result, with a high possibility is a pretty strong possible.

Thank you Mark

Edited

Alas getting a result with a yDNA test can be fortuitous, I was lucky, many are not hence my “set low expectations” advice.

You are more likely to find relations via an atDNA test and uploads as per what has been explained.

My own GGG GF was born in 1775 and if I found a 4C then we would share about 35cM but the range could be 0 to 139cM.  The Zero is correct, at this level it is very possible that you are biologically related to a 4C and yet you share none of your mutual GGG GF’s DNA with your 4C.

Looking slightly further back may yield results, my Wife’s DNA and my own has given us 5C DNA Cousins at 20-40cM shared so it does work. It helps to populate the children of the MRCA and they in turn can yield results even when nobody has taken a DNA test in that line.