powermad5000

Long term parking lot coin. Extremely damaged.

Hello and welcome to the forum!

After spending some time studying your coin side by side with images of genuine examples, I have to say that I feel your coin is not genuine. I'll start on the reverse. Namely I notice the T's on the reverse do not have the same shape as a genuine example. The word AMERICA does not seem to have all of the letters at the same height as would be on a genuine example. Also, the denticles don't seem to be well formed.

On the obverse, the denticles just kind of fade out on the bottom between about 3 o'clock and 8 o'clock. One glaring thing I found on the obverse is a missing leaf on the left side of the shield under the left knob. Also the upper leaf that extends out from under the shield on the left side should extend near the bunch of leaves and have a very small gap between actually touching. On this, there is too large a gap in this area. I did not locate any known varieties to support these anomalies, and while it would normally be worth further examination, I think with the definite misshaped T's on the reverse is enough to say this is another portion of the coin which was struck from dies missing certain details and certainly not genuine.

Even though there is wear on this coin, I do not see split serifs and the secondary image is not at the same height as the primary image. My vote is in the camp with the others that it is strike/mechanical doubling and also agree it was probably a loose die.

As promised, I have returned with photos of the mini coins I have had for so long. Turns out they are mini ASE's. Inside the tiny tube is ten of them. I just wanted to come back and add to this thread since I own some mini coins myself.

Thanks for the update with the pics. While they are not fully cropped or properly oriented, I think they will suffice to give an opinion on your coin.

Based on the rough moonlike appearance to the surfaces, I would say this coin was loosely buried in dirt for a while and cleaned up, or it was a parking lot coin for a while and got recovered. It looks like environmental damage and I notice a small chunk taken out of the neck on the obverse.

Either way, it is just a damaged coin.

I was looking through some other pictures and I noticed this in the background of one of them. It is a Canadian Loonie and based on size appears to be the size of a large dinner plate. It is some sort of mounted display piece on a base.

Looks like a lot of environmental damage to the reverse. I can't tell from the photo if that is gunk or paint or some kind of glue or adhesive or epoxy on the surface of the obverse. With the condition it is presently in, it couldn't hurt to soak it in some acetone and see if those spots on the obverse actually come off or not.

I just think it is a quarter that has had a very rough life.

Man, I totally remember this book! It was the first coin book I ever owned! Same year even. I bought one new when I started becoming interested in collecting. I would just read and dream. I don't know what happened to my copy. I know I no longer have it. I may have just let the local library have it once the prices in it seemed to no longer apply to the actual market. Now I wish I would have kept it.

Cool @J P M!

Hello and welcome to the forum!
 

When I saw the exposed zinc of the core of the cent, and the way the "secondary" image is presented towards the rim, I immediately went to split plate doubling which is not a true form of doubling. There were many issues the Mint had with the copper plating of these cents since they began it in 1982. A partial list of some of the issues encountered are split plate doubling, plating bubbles, linear plating bubbles, cracked plating, and plating pieces flaking off but not like lamination errors.

This is not doubling nor is it an error, but is simply seen as poor quality control by the Mint.

Better pics in your last round there. Just crop from there and I think you will have adequate photos.

Hello and welcome to the forum!

I don't see actual doubling of any kind on this cent. The "Double Ear" Lincoln cents had a full secondary lobe lower than the initial lobe. I see something at the back of Abe's ear on your cent, and if you have many just like this I would say that possibly a part of the die came out as a chip during previous strikes and left a void in the die that produced what you are seeing. 

I am not sure if this would even be recognized as a variety as I am not sure if anything involving die chips becomes recognized as such. I will let the others give their opinions as mine is only one of many.

I do not see any pics in this post. Please revisit and add them so we can give our assessments of your coins.

Hello and welcome to the forum!

What I immediately noted on your coin was the flow lines in the metal of the fields flowing out towards the rim. This is an indication that the coin was struck with a late stage set of dies that were basically worn out. Most know the Mint is notorious for overusing dies to the point of failure to save money.

I also noted immediately this effect basically surrounding the either letters in LIBERTY. This is a second indication that what you are seeing is not a true hub doubling and would not be considered a DDO but rather would be die deterioration doubling or aka die erosion doubling. It is not a form that collectors have any interest in and is very common on many series of coins past and present. It adds no value to the coin.

This would definitely not be a coin to submit for grading.

For the future, DDO, DDR, RPM, and RPD are not mint errors but rather varieties.

Everyone has some kind of issue with taking photos of coins. My phone either sometimes makes the pic look "juiced" so I try to delete all those, or does not capture the surface well. Best you can do is keep experimenting with whatever equipment you have. One thing I do know is that proper lighting is critical to the photo being the best it can be.

I don't think there is any restrictions on how many posts or replies you can make in a day. I do know sometimes the forum can be a little "glitchy" at times. Sometimes, I have to log out for a while and come back to it later.

Hello and welcome to the forum!

This question would be better posted in the Ask/NGC section of the forum. Also, it might be necessary to give NGC customer service a call and describe it to them for a answer.

I honestly do not know the answer to this particular question. Being they grade all kinds of Exonumia, I don't see why not, but it would be prudent to check with them first.

This coin is on its way to no longer existing as a coin.

When trying to determine varieties of any coin, it is necessary to provide clear, fully cropped photos of both sides of the coin to be able to verify any of the markers needed to determine the particular variety.

This is very clear in the forum instructions.

Hello and welcome to the forum and the hobby!

I hope you find as much enjoyment in it as most of us here do! 

Cool collection to inherit! Kudos!

Hello and welcome to the forum!

While your Bicentennial Quarter looks to have nice surfaces and very little wear for a circulation find, as stated, the high mintage number and the fact that this was the first change to the design since its inception in 1932, many collectors saved pristine specimens of these coins and stored them, sometimes by the roll. This coin does not add any value until it is in uncirculated condition and even then at entry MS grades may only add about twice its face value. It does not gain any type of premium until grades of MS65 which only adds a slight premium. Modest premium goes to grades above that and only superb gem BU specimens of the highest grade gain significant premium as those are sought by collectors for registry competition sets.

I save every one of these I get no matter how poor the condition is and have a bag of over 200 of them, but most of them do not look as nice as the one you have. I would keep it in a 2x2 cardboard flip or put it in an album if I were in your shoes.

In order for the members here to give you proper assessments of your posted coins, in the future, please post fully cropped, clear, and properly oriented photos of the coin. We don't need to see the background or most of the holder that the coin sits in. In your posted photos here, the coin is too far away and too small for us to be able to see what may be necessary details of possibly a scarce variety such as if it were a 1918/7 variety.

We can only help you properly based on what you provide us in your query. If we get far away photos of poor quality, then our assessments might not actually be accurate because there is something we cannot see or we might miss a critical detail on your coin.

On 4/27/2024 at 1:51 AM, Cody$7707 said:

Also I'm aware that they are the large date I just need a 2nd opinion on one of em

Yes, they are all large date. On which of these do you need an opinion? It probably would be better to post a pic of the one you were looking to get an opinion on in your response rather than to have the members here have to scroll and get it right on which one you are referring to.