coinman1794

This is a Type one reverse, which is a little better if the grade is gem or better. The extra fat lettering is the giveaway. I can't grade it from those pictures, but I can see that it is probably not a 67.

The toning is modest, even for a clad toner. I'm also surprised it was able to make MS68 with a 2mm long bag mark on Washington's head.

On 2/19/2020 at 11:05 AM, Ratzie33 said:

This piece has retoned attractively, but in my opinion, it appears to be a Cleaned or Altered Surfaces coin that will not straight grade. The videos are not zoomed in enough to be very useful. However, the fact that the reflectivity is not just limited to the fields, but also extends over the devices tells me that it was altered surfaces and not a polished die.

Normally, there will be a contract between the mirrored fields and the devices. Sometimes the devices will actually be frosted with some traces of Cameo. The devices should not be reflective, and you should not see reflectivity rolling over wear spots. I'm also wondering why I see so little handling on a piece in the AU53-55 grade range. The handling lines may have been erased.

On 7/3/2019 at 4:02 PM, Jvegas said:

So I purchased this 15 years ago at an antique estate sale among confederate bills and other early 1800's coins, all were authentic.  Never could tell if this was the real deal.  Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

This piece is completely genuine, but it is not a coin, it's a medal.

This is the bronze, 1962 Bashlow Restrike (HK-853A) of the famous 1876 Dickeson Continental Dollar copy (HK-853). These are fairly popular and can sell for good prices in the right grades. This one does not look bad, considering the sulfurous packaging that caused almost all of these to tone.

We have done a couple different educational articles on the variations of these medals:

http://www.dmrarecoins.com/Research-Articles.php

4 hours ago, Mason254 said:

I notice the letters are different than others I've seen 

This is the more common Type 2 reverse, characterized by narrow lettering. The Type 1 chows fat letters, by comparison, and is scarcer.

On 5/7/2019 at 9:26 PM, MAULEMALL said:

Is that damage to the obverse on the jaw?

This variety often comes with striking softness on the central obverse.

35 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

Usually a waterpic will have plastic parts in it that will be attacked by the acetone (and may deposit dissolved plastic on your coins.)

That was also my first thought.

This does look like a die chip, to me.

On classic US coins (pre 1839), a rotated reverse is relatively common and not considered a major error. Thus, it tends to have little or no affect on the value, in many cases. Therefore, I would argue it is a matter of taste, and I would also prefer not to have a rotation.

On later coins, this error is much more unusual and will add value to a coin if the rotation is greater than 10-15%, in most cases. These are generally classified as Mint Errors and collected mostly by the Error community.

Make sure to set the white balance on your camera if possible. Some of your backgrounds have a noticeable, reddish tinge.

On 10/21/2018 at 7:34 AM, Alex in PA. said:

I have to agree.  Maybe I have old fashioned thinking but I try very hard not to buy coins with stickers on.  Do you know CAC dealers even have a "W" sticker now that 'supposedly' certifies your coin is Blast White!  I Pay a TPG (NCG & PCGS) to certify a coin and grade it.  I trust them to be honest and provide a fair grade.  Oh for the old, old days when none of this inflated stuff was around and prices were easy. 

For a short time, NGC used a W designation to classify a coin as White. I have not seen stickers for this, as you mention, but I believe you because White is a thing. Personally, when I see bright white, I know not to buy.

This is another obvious fake.

On 9/18/2018 at 7:29 AM, Six Mile Rick said:

I am pretty sure that NGC does not grade altered coins. As there are probably many altered counter stamp coins it would make a fun raw ungraded collection. For a grading company they are altered after minted and would be details. You might get that put in a NGC slab though but more than likely it would be BU details altered.

NGC does grade counterstamped coins if they are widely collectible. Counterstamped Bust quarters and halves are an example, as are chop marked Trade dollars. I don't know if they would slab this or not. It would have to be published in a reference they trust.

I had to do a double take because, at first, I thought this was the Mel Wacks 1978 counterstamp, at first.

This coin seems to have semi-PL qualities, but the mirrors don't seem to be strong enough to actually qualify as PL. It probably won't qualify as a Star because most semi-PL, Star coins will have a fully PL obverse. Personally, I wouldn't waist any more money on this one. PL collectors will recognize that it's special.

On 8/14/2018 at 7:12 PM, LINCOLNMAN said:

Considering the Lincoln cent's popularity as a series and the scarcity of copper 43's, it could certainly be considered King. There are rarer and more spectacular errors, but most non-error collectors couldn't name a specific one. The cent being auctioned is well up there in numismatic history. 

The case for the 1943 is also helped by the fact that it's not a mangled scrap of garbage, like many Mint Errors. I suspect its popularity also stems from the (old) possibility of finding one in circulation, and from its connection to WWII.

21 hours ago, coinman_23885 said:

 

I don't recall any die polish lines on my PL buffalo nickel, but it is the only PL coin that I have owned or had occasion to view from the 1930s through the mid 1950s that didn't have heavy die polish lines.  This includes pretty much every series that PL designated coins exist for including steel cents, Mercury Dimes, silver Roosevelt Dimes, Walking Liberty Half Dollars, Franklin Half Dollars, Washington quarters, and Jefferson nickels (including war nickels).

The polished-PL dies of San Fransico, seen between 1934 to 1955, seem to have started out looking like smooth glass, with very fine polishing lines. As the dies began to wear, the lines would become more pronounced, appearing to get wider and more raised. Eventually starbursting would erase them and a thick frost would take over completely. Some Denver Mint pieces show the same surfaces, while a select few other Denver PLs have an orange peal textured PL luster, in addition to the fine polishing lines. The same thing happens to them as they wear out. Your 1936-D nickel seems to be in the latter category.

Jason, I tend to agree, but I would love to see more research to solidify something on these.

I said this because I was considering the possibility that the Robert Morris prototype in silver was a Continental Dollar. I guess I read that into the text. What was his coin, though?

My thoughts after having read the January article only:

The evidence seems very convincing, though it is quite patchy and circumstantial. I'm disappointment they did not present any evidence to suggest when these pieces were actually made, or by whom. It remains possible they were made during the War, it not by the Congress, then perhaps for the Congress to consider. What if the coins sent to the Chemist were silver versions, and the pewter are restrikes? Perhaps they were hidden away by whomever made them, during the war, and they reappeared around 1783. Or, if the small flyer was issued to accompany them as medals, we now have a new So-Called Dollar listing to submit, HK-0, which will be the most valuable So-Called Dollar ever made and could be a boon to medal collectors everywhere.

In my opinion, because we never knew where they came from, their having been mentioned and discussed by founding fathers really helps, and not hurts, their appeal. Finally, I do not believe that base metal currency would have been accepted as money, certainly not as a "dollar." Early Americans were very sensitive about their underweight coppers. Even medals of inferior metal were less appealing at the time.

We'll see what I think after reading July!

I did find the reverse video, thanks!

The call is going to be very close, as it still seems a little bit borderline. The mirrors have to be unbroken with consistent reflectivity. The angle of the video is not adequate for examination, as many semi-PL coins will reflect text in that way. The reverse looks a little bit stronger. I can't tell if it the obverse has areas where frosty starbursting interrupts the reflection in spots. 

As of a couple years ago, there had been only 1 PL bronze Lincoln cent certified, so NGC is very hard on them.

The obverse looks borderline PL, but keep in mind that NGC is very strict. There is no video of the reverse. I think it should at least get a Star.

On February 7, 2018 at 12:52 AM, LoriBird23 said:

With that clue - I found this description and information on http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/galba/t.html :

Galba Paduan type AE "Sestertius". 1500-1570 AD. IMP SER SVLP GALBA CAES AVG TR POT, laureate draped bust right / S-C, emperor on platform standing left, before five soldiers, ADLOCVT in ex. Klawans 3.

Galba, AE ''sestertius'' struck from dies by Giovanni Cavino,      1500-1570, (20.18g) apparently overstruck over a genuine Roman  sestertius, as were many of his ''medals''. IMP SER SVLP GALBA CAES AVG TR POT Laureate and draped bust right. / Emperor on  platform standing left, before five soldiers, S C at sides,      ADLOCVT in exergue. Kwalans 3/ 4 (These dies).

Does this seem to match as well as I think it does??

This looks more like an original sestertius than a 16th century Italian recreation because it's so weakly struck. However, it looks like it's possibly the same dies as the Cavino, and it does appear to be an over-strike, so it could well be a poorly executed Cavino.