powermad5000

I wish the guy who gave the other guy the idea to take a Dremel tool to a coin and the guy from this video would both take their respective Dremel tools and David Copperfield them right into their eyeballs. Acid guy should take an acid bath or an acid shower and finish melting that brain. The horrors!!!!! Even Freddy isn't going to sleep after watching those! Plus, the Dremel guy also let the coin hit the shaft of the attachment to ruin the coin even more. ........I have to go for a minute......I am going to throw up..................... I'm back, no, wait, I have to go throw up again..... @Hoghead515 called it......these videos show everything NOT to do.

It is difficult to tell from the OP's photos, but I think it may be the 1837 Large 5C LM-1 H10C Valentine : V-3 variety. Looking at the date numerals I don't see a close match to the other varieties based on the shape and position of the numerals, and I think I might see the tail at the bottom of the seven in the variety I mentioned. I have included a photo of the date closeup from the NGC VarietyPlus page showing the lowered tail of the 7 at the end of this post. For one of these in VG-F condition, its price guide listing is basically $70-85, but that is for a coin without the damage present on the OP's coin, which has some very heavy damage affecting both sides of the coin. As for what a dealer would pay for it in the condition as it sits, I would say not much at all if not just taking a pass on it being it might be hard for a dealer to sell with that amount of damage.

Nice looking one! For the sake of curiosity, what did you pay for it?

I'm no paper currency expert but I would say the value of the note lies solely in the serial number as @Fenntucky Mike stated. Despite any of its flaws, if a hardcore paper collector was putting together sets of 01 serial numbers, you would have to buy this note despite its condition. I think if the OP were looking to sell it, there would be no way to determine what a flat amount would be. This would have to be sold at an auction.

If NGC cannot determine what the object that was that the coin was struck through, they will just label the slab as MINT ERROR - STRUCK THROUGH. I have a lot of graded strike through errors and they all simply state Mint Error - Struck Through.

I submitted the dime missing the word 'WE' to NGC and it came back regular graded with the explanation of "Too Minor", so I guess that falls under mint tolerance.

Welcome, and there are no silly questions in the pursuit of knowledge. All things mentioned above combined, the Mint also is notorious for overusing dies to get the most strikes out of one set to keep their costs down. The effect you are seeing I agree is die deterioration doubling also known as die erosion doubling. In the modern high speed presses, there are also a lot of questions that come into this forum about coins that have die chips. This again is the Mint overusing sets of dies until they start to break.

Interesting. I did not know the mintage was so low on the 2009 D nickels. Now I have another coin to look for...lol!

For these Lincoln cents, this is well within mint tolerances and, no, the die was not broken. Most likely the die was slightly misaligned before your coin was struck. I have several Roosevelt dimes in which either the W or in one case the entire word WE was actually cut off due to a misaligned die and those are also not errors and are within mint tolerance.

NCS conservation will stabilize the surface of the coin to prevent further spread of issues, so if that is what you are looking to do for the coin then by all means send it in to NCS. I was simply stating there are limitations on what conservation will achieve for the coin itself and for its appearance as sometimes people on the forums here think that conservation can magically remove all the problems a coin has. Not saying that was your intent in your original post, but I was just relaying some ground truth on NCS as I have sent a number of coins to them over time.

You can read the following link to the NGC article regarding the shipwreck grading system. (A) is the top of the shipwreck level as far as grading terms for minimal surface corrosion and highest eye appeal. https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/10202/shipwreck-effect

As having just submitted a handful of coins to NCS for consideration and three out of four accepted, one was a merchant token from 1858-1860 with dark spots. NCS conserved this token, but I learned from the process once there is environmental damage to the surface such as is the case on your Lincoln Wheat Cent, conservation can "lessen" the severity of the spots but cannot remove them. Once the surface is compromised through environmental damage, it is permanent. Conservation also cannot restore red color to Lincoln cents that have turned RB or BN.

Hello @GBrad! Glad you are still with us on the green side! Same not having the coin in hand, but I'll entertain a guess for fun. I say MS 64 RD.

I am not exactly sure if there is a strike through error on this coin. To me, the lines on the right side of the flap on Lincoln's suit look like linear plating bubbles. I want to say to the left side of the flap on Lincoln's suit would be a strikethrough error for a piece of wire, BUT, I note one other small line near the rim under the larger line. What are the chances that a mint error for a struck through piece of wire took a small hit right under that area that is perfectly parallel to the potential strikethrough?? I am going to say the graders would cast this coin as physically damaged.

I agree that it would be necessary to have the coin in hand to be able to determine where a wheel mark would be at, especially on this Morgan with substantial chatter on the face, neck, and some in the surrounding fields. As for resubmission of the coin, you do not need to crack the coin out of the holder. NGC will unholder the coin for you. It has to be its own single submission, however, and cannot be lumped in with other coins on the submission. Leave it in the holder and check the box for regrade. Again, it has to be the only coin on the submission form unless you are sending back other slabs for regrading. In this way, NGC can delete the original submission number and any images of the original submission.

I simply cannot accept weights from some of the scales I see in the photos in this forum. That scale is an older pocket scale. So far, my experience has been that most of these pocket scales are not accurate to begin with. Calibrating a scale that is not accurate will also give you a non-accurate weight. Instead of the metal testing you would be better off taking this coin to a jewelry shop that has a very expensive but accurate scale and asking them to weigh the coin for you. I am not going to say it is not possible for it to be underweight, but it is highly unlikely to be.

????????? As it seems you are new to this, I suggest you spend a little time reading on the website error-ref.com. You can also type in mint error in the search box on this website and read the four part series on learning grading - what is a mint error.

I see a faint 9 on a well worn quarter with a hit that pushed some metal up next to the 9. Post mint damage. Not an error.

Welcome to the forum! I agree with @Just Bob. Die erosion doubling and the plating issues common to cents of the time period from roughly 1982-1999. I see no errors on your coin. This coin is not worth submitting.

I think you answered your own question.

From what I can tell from your photos which if properly orientated would be helpful, the nickel seems to be a Type 1, the dime a Type 1, the quarter a Type 2, and the SBA a Type 1.

There is one thing I do wonder when sending submissions to NGC and maybe this will tie into the story of your coin. Once we put our coins into a flip for submission, everyone will do this differently. Some will do this by hand holding the coin by the edge. I myself never actually touch my coins. I use a small (new pieces every time) piece of thin cardboard like the thickness found on cases of pop cans and handle the coin with two pieces of this being very careful not to let the coin slide while it is on the cardboard. I basically hold the flip open and deposit the coin into the flip, move the pieces away from the coin and back the cardboards out. Something could have happened when putting the coin into the flip. That part aside where something could possibly happen to a coin, once that submission is closed in its box, I don't think any of us can know after its travel experience. I think of the box moving between AC and a hot truck in the summer. What about the box being moved on a day of high humidity? I am sure the box isn't always in a temperature and humidity controlled environment (albeit sealed by us, but NOT airtight). What if the box happens to be delayed and is stuck in a truck in Florida during a high heat, high humidity day? Couldn't that not be enough to cause something like this to happen? We would not store our coins in the back of a truck that is heating up to possibly 140 degrees in the hot sun with 90%-100% humidity but we have no control over that box after it has left our hands. I have had on occasion Lincoln Wheat cents or Indian Head cents that I submitted that were rich in red color, but seemed to return in the holder less of a red to me and that is what made me wonder what happens to the box after it leaves our hands? Something to think about....

If I were looking at that coin as raw, with no label and no holder, I would have gone VF on it and I would have bid VF on it. I think there is a little too much wear on the eagles wing feathers as well as the leaves and cotton bolls on the obverse. I also think the hair above the brow on the obverse would need a little more detail to make XF. The color to me I feel is consistent with a Morgan of wear. But that is just me. And I have been wrong on grades before. Also, on the part of discussion on the toning, I recently submitted a 1902 O MS 64 Morgan I got for a great price to NCS for conservation because of the black toning on it. It almost looks like the coin was laying next to an object being spray painted black and some of the overspray hit part of the coin. The spotty toning did not cover the entire surface. I was charged the $5 NCS rejection fee and the slab returned in a bag stating that conservation was not a good idea for this particular coin as it could possibly not improve the surface or look of the coin but could also compromise the MS 64 grade as well. So, I learned from that toning can hide imperfections and affect the grade sometimes positively.

Hello and welcome! In my opinion, I think you have a normal O. The micro O seemed to fit about just perfectly between the two ends of the ribbon above it, and it also has a noticeably wide field between the mintmark and the DO in Dollar. The 1899 micro O also seems to have a little tilt towards 1 o clock. The normal O extends into the two ends of the ribbon and has less field between DO in Dollar. It also is righted at 12 o clock. Yours to me looks like the normal O.

1921 Morgans.....P (no mintmark), D, or S. There are differences in prices for the different mintmarks, but unless you are getting into higher end MS (64 and above), we are talking $20-40 difference for low end MS and below. There are generally tons of 1921 Morgans in all three mintmarks out there and just about every local coin shop (generally speaking) will have one. Very low end examples can go for melt value but generally for one with a decent amount of detail expect to be in the $50-75 range. You can check out local coin shops and local coin dealers, jewelry exchanges that also buy coins, pawn shops, and estate sales, and I am sure there has been a case or two where one was sold at a garage sale.