Just Bob

According to Variety Vista, RDV-007 was not introduced until 1992. RDV-005 is the normal reverse for 1988. RDV-006 is the "transitional" reverse.

I was able to find another C.K Nixon token in Steve's auction to go with the one posted above. It is a 25 cent piece, also brass.
(Photo compliments of ebay seller Steve Hayden - used with permission:)
 

Some new purchases I won off of Steve Hayden. Pictures courtesy of Steve, but I cropped/edited them to work in my Civil War Token template.

I was able to find another C.K Nixon token in Steve's auction to go with the one posted above. It is a 25 cent piece, also brass.
(Photo compliments of ebay seller Steve Hayden - used with permission:)
 

I was able to find another C.K Nixon token in Steve's auction to go with the one posted above. It is a 25 cent piece, also brass.
(Photo compliments of ebay seller Steve Hayden - used with permission:)
 

I was able to find another C.K Nixon token in Steve's auction to go with the one posted above. It is a 25 cent piece, also brass.
(Photo compliments of ebay seller Steve Hayden - used with permission:)
 

Nice find 

Given that you already found a couple of bogus pieces in that lot, if you have as much sense as you seem to, you will now be questioning the authenticity of any piece therein that seems to be valuable enough anyone would bother to counterfeit it.

It is a large date.

I agree with the others. The way you have them displayed now looks great. I particularly like that  acrylic riser that supports the dies in the rear. Did you make that yourself?

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

By that logic, any law is meaningless if one person does not obey it. So, according to your statement, laws prohibiting theft or murder are meaningless, because not everyone follows the law.
Here is a thought: I will follow the rules, and you follow the rules, and we won't worry about what anyone else does. Capiche?
 
Sorry, Larry. Your thread has been hijacked plenty without me jumping in to comment, but sometimes enough is enough.

The mint had problems getting Lincoln Memorial cents to strike up fully on the upper part of the reverse, due to the fact that it is directly opposite the lower part of the bust on the obverse, which was a relatively high relief part of the design. If you look at cents from the early 80s especially, this is a common occurrence. They lowered the relief in '85 or '86 to try to alleviate the problem, but it didn't always work, as seen by the OP's coin.

That really depends on who is buying. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered for sale to the public at a coin show, gun show, flea market, antique store, etc ? Probably. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered it to a knowledgeable coin collector? Maybe, depending on their long-term outlook for silver prices, and the coin market in general. Could you get ten dollars if you offered it to a dealer? No, not likely. You would probably get current melt value or a bit less.

That really depends on who is buying. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered for sale to the public at a coin show, gun show, flea market, antique store, etc ? Probably. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered it to a knowledgeable coin collector? Maybe, depending on their long-term outlook for silver prices, and the coin market in general. Could you get ten dollars if you offered it to a dealer? No, not likely. You would probably get current melt value or a bit less.

To me, they are as distracting as scratches. I feel the same about planchet adjustment marks on early gold and silver coins. That doesn't mean that I would never add one to my collection. It does mean that, given a choice between coins with and without die polish lines (or planchet adjustment marks), I would choose the coin without.
Oddly, there are other things that are distracting to many collectors that don't really bother me, like fingerprints. 

That really depends on who is buying. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered for sale to the public at a coin show, gun show, flea market, antique store, etc ? Probably. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered it to a knowledgeable coin collector? Maybe, depending on their long-term outlook for silver prices, and the coin market in general. Could you get ten dollars if you offered it to a dealer? No, not likely. You would probably get current melt value or a bit less.

That really depends on who is buying. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered for sale to the public at a coin show, gun show, flea market, antique store, etc ? Probably. Could you get ten dollars for it if you offered it to a knowledgeable coin collector? Maybe, depending on their long-term outlook for silver prices, and the coin market in general. Could you get ten dollars if you offered it to a dealer? No, not likely. You would probably get current melt value or a bit less.

Sure. Lets go with this. 
 

The reverse master die was just about worn out by 1984, and the letters and devices were spreading out to the point of touching, particularly on the motto. The die was used one more year before the new one was introduced for the dimes dated 1986.