powermad5000

I have been collecting for 45+ years and I am just starting to get into a higher level of learning. There is always something to learn and don't ever think you finally know all there is to know about collecting coins. There are so many things to read and learn, it can be overwhelming at times. In your shoes, it is important to learn the basic things well. As you had mentioned, shiny and uncirculated are only a basis of quality, not an overall determining factor of value. Before you submit any coin at your level of knowledge, get the NGC Red Book, and also the Official American Numismatic Grading Standards books (the ANA book is in its 7th edition, but you can still find the 6th edition on eBay for less than $!0). Get used to self grading the details of coins, and get used to mintage values as they relate to overall rarity and value. Those two books as starters will give you a good basic overall sense of collecting and values. From there, you can continue to expand your knowledge. As always, reading these forums, and posting your coins with good quality photos along with your question on here will go a long way towards gaining knowledge as said by the others above.

Thanks for the updated pics!

I will let the others who know more than me tell me I am wrong, but I looked up some examples of a 1985 Lincoln Memorial Reverse and what I notice in those photos is that the strikes were early die stage and that the lettering in the motto was further from the rim than on your example. What I note on your coin is the letters in the motto are closer to the rim than normal, I note the pressure ridge from the strike is pronounced and runs through the letters, and that there is minor mechanical doubling in some letters on your coin suggesting it was struck with late stage dies. All those factors combined can make the metal flow from the strike do things it normally would not in the case of new or early stage dies. My guess is with the position of the strike and the wear of the dies not fully controlling the metal flow, that the top of the S in question "flattened out" making it appear like an upside down 2.

I agree with the others on this topic and mostly with Coinbuf's statement. On modern proofs, the TPG holder is typically going to cost more than the coin inside it when things are all said and done, sometimes even in the case of a PF 70 UC depending on how many the mint made. Modern proof values are usually static as the mintage number is well known and they are not placed in circulation so it is not hard for a collector to find high quality proof coins in the marketplace.

I will also add in that Sandon's statement is true, but toning or spots can develop on a coin even in the Mint packaging. The process of striking a coin causes a change in the metal of the planchet from the pressure used and there is no way of determining whether or not a specific planchet after being struck will develop toning or spots even in the OGP. It can happen shortly after being packaged or it can develop years after.

It would be helpful if you posted pics of both sides of the coin so a better evaluation could be made. If we knew the year of this coin, that may be the standard shape used for the S in TRUST the year the coin was made, and I would already be leaning heavily toward that.

Hello and welcome!

As the others have said, a details grade is for a problem coin. Anything from scratches, cleaning, environmental damage, mechanical damage, whizzing, tooling, wheel marks, rim damage, a bent coin, polished, repairing, holes, physical damage, counterstamps, chopmarks, and just about anything in between that affected the original surface of the coin will get a coin with a details grade. NGC does not assign a numeric grade to a details coin, but rather the general level of the remaining devices. I would not worry about trying to assess yourself a numerical grade to a details coin (unless it is UNC Details or extremely low mintage number coins or rare varieties) as most collectors will pass on details graded coins, and you should expect those that would purchase a details coin to pay at least one to up to three grade levels lower than listed in the price guides. A coin with XF details may only sell at a price in the VG grade level depending on how it is damaged. The more severe the damage, the more visible the damage is to the naked eye, the less someone is going to pay for the coin. A details coin at the G level of the grading spectrum (once again unless it is extremely low mintage) is basically going to end up selling for a price at or below the Poor level in value. 

I'm no expert on Lincoln Proofs, but it could always be possible that a matte proof somehow got accidentally put into circulation. I once got a statehood quarter proof in my change at a McDonalds drive through window. Not likely, but not impossible scenario either.

IMHO I do not see anything wrong with two coins you have. On the obverses, the placement and shape of the letters and dates all seem to be correct and in the proper places and on the reverses, the lettering also looks to be correct as well as the mintmark shape and position. I do not see the area around the mintmarks disturbed as would be in an altered mintmark. The wear looks appropriate for both sides of both coins and the denticles appear to be appropriate for the wear. Other than they may have been cleaned in the past, I am not seeing any issues with your two coins.  I can't see any of the typical counterfeiting mistakes that I have found on this series. I do not know if you have a scale but their weights should be 3.11 grams.

Good picks! I am still working on adding those to my collection if I could only stop getting distracted currently by Morgans and Peace dollars 

Looking again, the lettering in LIBERTY in the shield on the obverse doesn't look right to me either.

What disturbed me the most upon checking out the coin was that with that level of wear on the reverse (enough to wear the claws smooth, and the wear on the eagles face and wing tips, that the lines in the shield are not starting to blend together. When I looked at the obverse photo, there seems to me to be a lack of overall sharpness of details for an obverse that has a few stars near full definition on the west side. I am not sure if the position of date in varieties had moved closer to either the rim or to the rock, but after checking out a few photos, the dates in the genuine coins I viewed had the numerals placed closer to the rim, and the coin in question has the numerals closer to the rock. The weight might give a better indication of whether it is genuine or not, and why with just shy of 10,000,000 minted and if it were genuine would net about $200-250, but I am still skeptical about the coin in question. If not genuine, then maybe we are seeing another counterfeiting tack, higher mintage number and lower value to cause the buyer to be less suspicious and less likely to examine extremely thoroughly?

Very vague question.....assuming the same that you are asking about Lincoln Wheat and Lincoln Memorial cents there are a few key varieties spanning that date window. The 1955 DDO being the highest valued, but there is also a 1969 S DDO which can command some premium dollars as it is not easily found. In order to get higher dollar values across that span I agree with Sandon that the grades need to be at the top end of the MS spectrum. Due to high mintage numbers, even MS 66 specimens won't command any huge premiums.

You question could have easily been answered by looking into any book form or online price guides.

You would have to submit it under the Modern tier. I am not sure they will grade it in the Mint Box as they do with other Mint sealed issues (as in blue chip IKE's, or GSA Morgans). You should call NGC directly to ask that question as I have only seen these graded in typical NGC holders and NGC is not allowed to remove your coin from the original packaging for the risk of getting blamed for damage resulting in doing so. There are three labels that I know of that you can request to be put on the label which are High Relief, Early Release (or First Releases), and First Day of Issue. I am not sure how you go about proving which category it falls under.

I would in your case here call NGC directly and ask their customer service to help guide you through your submission. They are there to help you get the proper way to submit and also get the correct label for your coin.

The only errors I know of that produce strange surface pits or depressions are a lamination error or a strike through error. I am not sure this falls under those categories. I would lean towards that being a point of damage. IMHO it would get a details grade for damage.

Just pondering this for a bit, the letters in AMERICA all seem to be sitting at the same level (height) above the two lines rounding underneath the letters. I would think if there was a die gouge, the letters would be "wavy" in height above the field as the metal flow during the strike would be partially diverted from the letters into the gouge. I could be totally wrong on this. I don't see how in the minting process those curved lines could be a part of the strike as they do not travel across the entire reverse of the coin, so I am leaning towards the original planchet having a defect. Being it is not "too minor" as in some errors not attributed by NGC as a mint error, but there is enough of the reverse image disturbed and is also easily visible to the naked eye, I would definitely submit this coin as a mint error and see what NGC thinks of it.

In my opinion, none of the numerals appear to be correct. As in the example provided by Sandon of a genuine coin, on an 1877, all the numerals at the bottom are in line with each other except for the last 7 which is slightly below the other three. On your coin, the base of the 1 does not extend far enough away from the 8 to the left. The 8 seems smaller than all the other numerals. the first 7 is higher than all the other numerals, and the position and shape of the last 7 is just terrible. I also see depressions around the two 7's indicating material was removed in this area. Most certainly not genuine.

In the future, please include clear photos of both sides of the entire coin in addition to the areas in question, but I am in agreement with Coinbuf. Another modern era strike doubling.

You can use this as a reference as for details.

VAM-1AE2 is not listed in the NGC variety plus section for a 1921 D, so I don't know how widely recognized it is. I agree with Sandon and believe the coin to have been cleaned. As far as details I would say if submitted the coin would return as AU Details - Cleaned as I can see wear on the hair and the top of the cap on the obverse and parts of the ribbon and eagles breast feathers on the reverse.

On 2/18/2023 at 7:04 PM, JNelson27 said:

Yikes! What a group. My comment was only for bsshog40... and I thought his response was quoted. Anyway, bye.

With all due respect, making a post on this forum allows everyone to read it. If you wanted to ask a specific person a question, you should PM them. The people on here are extremely knowledgeable. Please do not mistake their opinions as being rude when they are only being straightforward and honest in their assessment. In your shoes, I would appreciate them sharing their knowledge with you on a volunteer basis. Collecting is a forever learning experience as no one person knows all and there is always something new to learn.

On 2/17/2023 at 1:28 PM, VKurtB said:

The reason I wrote what I did above is that there seems to be a strong contingent of new collectors who have decided that ALL doubling is interesting to them.

What is even worse is this same contingent of new collectors firmly believes all mechanical or die erosion doubling is an error and is worth premium dollars. As well as every minor imperfection, die crack, slightly imperfect strike well within mint tolerance, or chip/stain/spot/cud on modern coins is now a strike error and refuse to be otherwise educated that it is not.

Better photos would help to better answer your question, but from what I can tell in your photos, the coin you have has an unnatural surface to me. Dipped is still cleaned, cleaned is still not good. And any of the reputable TPG's are going to know whether or not a coin has been cleaned. You won't be able to "pull one over" on them. You learned a lesson on the Peace dollar you mentioned. Don't make the same mistake with this coin.