James_OldeTowne

It looks like strike-doubling to me.

For me, there are perhaps a handful of "important" pedigrees - and even those aren't all THAT important. Otherwise, I couldn't care less about what bank hoard, or pop top collection, or sports figure, or gangster previously owned MY coin. Newman? yes. Norweb? yes. Pittman? definitely. Eliasberg? maybe. Bill Smith??? No thanks.

It looks like a normal proof that has acquired some toning (or "haze").

It's neat to see common, humble coins like these being passed down. They aren't financially valuable ($18 wholesale, $24 retail, or something like that) but have significant sentimental value!

If I am interpreting the photos as showing incused anomalies, it does look like a pretty nifty strike-through. Good stuff!

Here is an NGC MS-63 which sold a few days ago for 14,455 including BP.

The mint surely wouldn't use "pure copper" as plating - that would be an exceptionally poor choice.

The Peace dollar appears AU to me, at least from those photos.

You mean, you got it for free or something like that? Not sure I understand, but in general, you are best not spending your good money on the cost of certification.

The 1945 appears to have been cleaned or heavily dipped.

It's a common counterfeit.

It appears to me the OP is heavily biased towards the dealer experience. In that case, financial gain always seems to be the overriding determinant of how "enjoyable" the coin market is. I am primarily a collector, so for me, the enjoyment experience trumps issues like "price" and "value". I have overpaid for coins numerous times (sometimes heavily), because I know that the pleasure of owning the coin more than makes up for losing some money during the financial transaction. (That's why I have owned many of my coins for 30 years or more.)

I think any collector, even if he primarily collects U.S., should consider one of these Medieval zecchino gold coins. They are cheap in light of the fascinating designs, often highly attractive production, and attainable grades. Beautiful coin you have there!

I agree with you! The discrepancy between grades these days (is it really only MS-61+? or only MS-61?) has become much too fine a line, today. It might be even be explainable for some coins, but the reality is that most coins are common and don't need such fine layers of discrepancy. I really don't care much whether that 2008 Sacawagea grades MS-63, or MS-63+. It's still worth a dollar to me.

An expense in getting coins certified that is frequently overlooked by collectors is the time lost while the coin is out-of-inventory. So if a coin takes 60 days to get certified, it could have been bought-and-sold several times over during that period. Dealers are much more keenly aware of this hidden expense, though. Of course, a collector who doesn't plan to sell the coin anyway loses nothing while the coin is away - the hidden expense applies only when the plan is to sell the coin(s) and reinvest profits in new inventory.

A "filled mintmark" is what I see from the photos.

Both subject coins appear, at best, AU. If your criteria is mostly based on the value of the coins, then they most definitely should not be sent in for certification.

There's likely some educational value in getting those certified (i.e., "what does cleaning look like?"), but that's a fairly expensive education in the big scheme of things.

Actually, you DO see evidence of cleaning, but you aren't acknowledging what you see (for whatever reason).

I agree with Dave - that die was overused and produced distorted strikes, resulting in what you're seeing. It is not an RPM.

I agree that it represents trivial damage, reasonably commensurate with light circulation.

I am thinking it would certify at least as F-12 to F-15. Normally, it's value would not be enough to really justify certification, but these are so doggone tough to grade that, for educational purposes, you might consider sending it in to NGC.

My first (slight) inclination was to think it might be an as-struck error. Now having read others' comments and after mulling over the possibilities, I am thinking this is worth certifying, mostly for the educational aspect.

It's machining damage of some sort.

I'd agree that it's a minor die defect. Considering the billions upon billions of Lincoln cents, this kind of quality anomaly is bound to slip through the mint just based on the "law of large numbers".