Sandon

The 1823 half dollar has been holed and plugged, with related tooling and burnishing, especially on the reverse around the plug. You can see a circle at the center top of the liberty cap where the rather large hole was, with a corresponding circle on the lower reverse. The hole apparently included the top of the numeral "5", which was re-engraved in an attempted "repair". I've never seen a reference to a "Tampered 3" 1823 variety. Where did you see this terminology? 1823s that aren't "normal" 3s are classified as "broken", "patched" or "ugly" 3s in the Redbook and elsewhere. This one may be a "patched" 3, although it is hard to tell from the photo. You might be able to determine the exact variety from the Overton book on Bust half dollars that you referred to in the initial post

I refrained from getting into this discussion for a while, as you all seemed certain that the coin was cleaned and/or counterfeit based solely on a single set of photos. The coin as photographed appears to me to be a lightly circulated (AU 50 or so) and likely genuine 1878-CC Morgan dollar with a natural shade of gray and good overall appearance for such a coin. Coins pick up patches of hairlining from coming into contact with rough surfaces, and those I can see aren't sufficient for me to call the coin "cleaned". My opinion could change if I could examine the actual coin and view it at different angles, lightings and magnifications. If a picture is worth a thousand words, the opportunity to view an actual coin is worth a thousand photos! As for the coin being counterfeit (or having an added mint mark) because the mint mark position doesn't appear to exactly match that of any known VAM variety, bear in mind that the VAM books and the "vamworld" site don't necessarily show all varieties, especially for a coin having a mintage over 2.2 million. New VAMS continue to be discovered and others delisted as die states of other varieties. A slightly different "mint mark tilted right" would only attract the attention of a real VAM enthusiast, which the vast majority of collectors aren't. I doubt that grading services check Morgans submitted to them for matches to VAM varieties unless they were submitted for attribution. Here again you'd need to see the actual coin to form a proper opinion.

Check out the "bibliography" toward the back of your standard or deluxe edition "Redbook", which lists references for each U.S. series. The bibliography is listed in the index. The 1836-39 Capped Bust half dollars are attributed in major auctions by Graham Reiver (GR) numbers, presumably from the Graham book referred to by Mr. Lange, which isn't included in the bibliographies. I don't know where you can get the book. Seated half dollars are attributed by Wiley-Bugert (WB) numbers from the books referred to by Mr. Lange, also referred to in the RB bibliographies. Many of these, as well as many varieties of subsequent series, are listed with photos on NGC "VarietyPlus" or PCGS Coinfacts, although there is usually no verbal description of a variety's distinctive characteristics. Before 1837 most U.S. coinage dies were individually made up from individual punches for the devices, letters, stars, numbers, etc., so each die pair produced a distinct variety. Beginning in or about 1837 dies for U.S. coins were generally produced from "hubs" that included all design elements except for the dates and any mint marks, so after that there are fewer dies that were distinctly different enough for every die and die marriage to be catalogued. Thereafter, die varieties are mainly from noticeably different date or mint mark positions, errors in the die making process, or damaged or worn dies. (Since the early 1900s the dates and since about 1991 mint marks are included in hubs.) This is why the only variety references that seek to be comprehensive are those for pre-1837 issues, and subsequent series references are less popular, with the notable exception of Morgan dollar "VAMS".

This does appear to be a doubled die, but if so, it is a very minor one that isn't most collectors' "cup of tea". If this is what you enjoy, more power to you, as these sorts of varieties are a lot easier to "cherry-pick" than the better-known varieties and can be purchased for no premium. You can simply put in your own holder and note the attribution. If you want to see if ANACS will attribute and grade it, you should ask them; but you should ask yourself whether it's worth it to you to do so.

I generally agree with the previous replies to this post. (This coin was severely corroded, and someone attempted to scrape off the corrosion, even further damaging the original surface of the coin.) However, the poster's question as to its value wasn't answered. If it is a 1925 Buffalo nickel with no mint mark, the corrosion and damage render it a "junk box" item that should sell for 25-50 cents. The photos don't show the area where a "D" or "S" mint mark would appear at the very bottom of the reverse beneath the gap between "FIVE" and "CENTS". With a mint mark it might sell for a few dollars--perhaps $5--to a beginning collector on a budget. By way of comparison an undamaged 1925 Buffalo nickel with original surfaces in Very Fine condition, this one's approximate details grade, would currently be sold by a dealer for approximately $9, a 1925-D for approximately $75, and a 1925-S for approximately $80 per the September 2022 Coin World Values. Condition means a great deal in coin valuation. If the poster would like to learn how to better evaluate coins, he may wish to refer to the following article that I posted:

You might want to post this inquiry on the U.S./Foreign/Ancient Coins forum instead of the Marketplace forum, which is for coins being offered for sale. All I know about these apparently privately issued patterns is that a set of them in silver ($2.50, $5, $10 and $20) was sold as a set as lot 371 of the famous Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr. collection for a total of $27,500 on May 20, 1996. The narrative in the catalog states that "they are known in silver, copper, and white metal, but not in gold," so your gilt specimen was presumably discovered later.

Under the circumstances you describe, your best option may be to have the collection professionally appraised, at least once you make a preliminary determination that it has substantial value. Most coin dealers will provide this service for a fee, as will some auction houses that accept routinely accept consignments of coins and some advanced collectors. In that way you will avoid disputes over whether each of the siblings received an equal share. Additionally, the laws of many states require such appraisals before such property can be distributed from a deceased person's estate. You should be easily able to determine the approximate value of mint issued items like the 1975 proof set you show from a recent edition "Redbook", which is $9 in the 2022 (last year's) edition. You are also showing what appears to be an uncirculated 1941-45 "short set" of "Mercury" dimes, the value of which may vary widely based on the market grade and striking quality of each of the coins, which we can't assess from photos and which requires a fair amount of grading experience. An average (MS 63-64) set could retail for $150-250, while one with many coins that grade MS 66 or higher or have "full split bands" on the reverse could be worth many multiples of that. If you aren't planning to become a serious collector yourself, you should consider having the collection appraised for this reason as well.

This is almost certainly a replica of a "Continental Currency dollar". While the original pieces are quite rare and valuable, huge quantities of copies and replicas have been made and sold as souvenirs over the years. They have little or no value. Based on its color, rough surface, poor detail despite a lack of wear, and comparison with photos of genuine pieces, your piece is one of the copies or replicas. If there are established coin dealers in your area, you could show your piece to them for an opinion, but I highly doubt that any experienced numismatist would think this one genuine. There is an old expression, "buy the book before the coin". If you are "new to the world of coin collecting", you shouldn't be buying "a bunch of coins at auction" without the knowledge to assess the authenticity, condition, and value of what you are buying. Learning about coins can itself be enjoyable and is essential to success as a collector. I have posted the following article identifying some of the print and online resources that will enable you to gain essential knowledge:

I agree with the others who have responded that this is a common date (1889 Philadelphia mint) Morgan dollar that has Extremely Fine to About Uncirculated details but was abrasively "cleaned", possibly with a pencil eraser. Collectors find such "cleaning" undesirable. The coin contains about $13.50 worth of silver at the current price of about $18 per ounce, and a dealer might pay between that amount and $25 or so for it. Therefore, it isn't worth certifying, as the NGC grading fee alone would be $23. If your father-in-law left a number of coins, I recommend that you purchase a current edition of the "Redbook" referred to in the article "Resources for New Collectors" to which EagleRJO provided a link, as it will give you some idea of coin values. For example, an 1889 Morgan dollar with a "CC" (Carson City) mint mark would be worth hundreds of dollars even in the condition your Philadelphia (no mint mark) specimen is in.

I agree that the grade is in the lower (20-25) part of the VF range, with nicks that might or might not preclude straight grading at a grading service. The mint mark looks a little odd. The first "C" looks rounder than that used this year and appears closer to the "D" in "DOLLAR" than any shown on the VAMWORLD site. (Compare with reverses shown for VAMs 1 and 7, the closest matches.) Due to the incentive to add mint marks to these, you might want to buy this date certified.

Jeremy Agens--Respectfully, you don't have to place similar posts about the same coin in every forum on the chat board. Most of the members seem to check them all out! For those who are seeing this for the first time, my answer to the similar post on the U.S./World Coins forum follows: It would be helpful if you could provide photos of both sides of the entire coin and a clearer photo of the close up to get a better idea of your possible mint error. From what I can see, your 2021 Tuskegee Airmen quarter most likely has a "die break" through the date area. Die breaks occur when coinage dies crack after becoming stressed from use, causing metal on the planchet (coin blank) to be pushed into the crack as the coin is struck, leaving a raised line. Another possibility is "clash marks" that result from the coinage press operating without a planchet in the press, causing the dies to strike against each other and parts of the design from one die to be transferred (reversed and incuse) to the other. (The curving line could be from the top of Washington's head on the other side, but there would likely be other areas of design transfer.) Both die breaks and clash marks are rather common occurrences in the minting process, and coins featuring either or both of them are usually worth only a small premium. There are other possibilities, such as your coin having resulted from multiple strikes, but, again, I would need better photos to offer any opinion on this.

As these coins are indistinguishable from any others of their date and type, the purchasers paid for what was printed on the little paper grading service tags, not for the coins themselves. They're assuming that the mint and the grading services kept the coins in their actual striking order, but there is no way to tell whether or not they actually did. People should be free to collect whatever they want and spend whatever they want on it, but this activity can't properly be referred to as numismatics, the study of things used as money, or even as coin collecting, since it isn't the coin that is really being collected.

It would be helpful if you could provide photos of both sides of the entire coin and a clearer photo of the close up to get a better idea of your possible mint error. From what I can see, your 2021 Tuskegee Airmen quarter most likely has a "die break" through the date area. Die breaks occur when coinage dies crack after becoming stressed from use, causing metal on the planchet (coin blank) to be pushed into the crack as the coin is struck, leaving a raised line. Another possibility is "clash marks" that result from the coinage press operating without a planchet in the press, causing the dies to strike against each other and parts of the design from one die to be transferred (reversed and incuse) to the other. (The curving line could be from the top of Washington's head on the other side, but there would likely be other areas of design transfer.) Both die breaks and clash marks are rather common occurrences in the minting process, and coins featuring either or both of them are usually worth only a small premium. There are other possibilities, such as your coin having resulted from multiple strikes, but, again, I would need better photos to offer any opinion on this.

The first two sets you show were definitely issued by the mint. I remember them being sold at the U.S. Mint's gift shops at the Treasury Building in Washington, D.C. and at the Philadelphia mint when I visited those venues in the early 1980s. The green envelope was standard, and the red one was offered for Christmas gifts. I purchased "The 1979 Dollar Souvenir Set" in the same light green envelope as your top 1980 set to obtain a specimen of the uncirculated 1979-S Anthony dollar, which was not included in the 1979 mint sets. It is likely that the bottom two sets are also mint issued sets with a different envelope. (I also saw one of these sets with an envelope designed for distribution at a FUN (Florida United Numismatists) show in the early 1980s.)

I've never found die cracks or breaks on modern U.S. proof coins, but I do have a proof 1894 Liberty nickel with reverse die cracks through and above the letters TATES OF AM. The reported mintage for this issue in proof was all of 2,632 pieces. Assuming that the mint dedicated a specific die pair to coining these proofs, it's interesting that such extensive cracks formed during this limited use.

Coin collecting can be a highly enjoyable pursuit, and we are happy to help you with your questions. However, you have to have some knowledge about coins even to ask a question that we can answer in a way that you will fully understand. To learn about U.S. coins, you should consider acquiring the books and trying out the websites suggested in the following thread that I began on this forum: For foreign coins one resource is the online NGC "World Coin Price Guide". Click the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page, go to "Price Guides" and then click "World Coin Price Guide".

Your link is to the Collection Manager (the logged-in viewing member's, fortunately not yours) and doesn't access your set. I was able to find your set by looking under the "Toned Coins" category for Custom Sets. You need to copy the web address shown in your address bar when your set is on the screen to create a link, which can be opened in the right click menu. Yours is Helton Showcase Of Toned Silver - Custom Set (collectors-society.com). You have some colorful specimens that should impress those contemporary collectors who like toned coins. I have a custom set entitled "Characteristics of Cleaned Coins", by which I try to show collectors how to recognize coins that are regarded as impaired due to "cleaning". It can be found at Characteristics of "Cleaned" Coins - Custom Set (collectors-society.com).

Sorry, but the doubling on the "9", "4", and "2" are classic examples of "strike doubling", which results from a die being slightly loose in the press when the coin is struck, as opposed to "die doubling", which results from the die being produced from a "hub" (die-making die) that was shifted in position between blows, resulting in doubling on all coins struck from that die. In strike doubling the lighter secondary image is shallower than the primary image ("step-like"), as it is on your coin. On a coin struck from a doubled die, like the 1972 doubled die cent shown below, the two images are about equally deep and sharp. Unfortunately, coins with strike doubling aren't actively sought by most collectors and usually don't have much value over coins with no doubling.

Coin #1 grades Fine by ANA standards. The color appears "off", so it could be "cleaned", but it could be the lighting of the photo. Based on the mint mark position and the raised lines and projections in the field between the Buffalo's belly and the ground, which are diagnostic for this die, it appears to be genuine; however, there is enough incentive to fake these that it would be preferable to purchase a certified specimen. As Fine 1937-D 3-legged Buffalo nickels list $550 in Fine in Coin World, it's most unlikely you could buy one for $100. But, as once I heard Carnac say, "may the Bird of Paradise leave a relic in your shoe!"

A dealer has told me that someone has been buying up and hoarding 1850 half cents in all grades, which is why you may be having trouble finding one in higher grade and why they've become so expensive. Tomorrow's (8/29) Stack's Bowers internet only auction has one graded AU 55 (lot 10149), and the current bid is $600 ($720 with buyer's fee). You may have to wait until the hoarder disperses the hoard.

This well circulated 1934 "Buffalo" nickel has corrosion or "environmental damage", especially on the reverse. U.S. nickels are composed of an alloy of 75% copper, 25% nickel. Copper is a very chemically active metal and is readily subject to discoloration and corrosion. Such coins are considered impaired and have less value than unimpaired examples. As a new collector you might benefit from some of the resources identified in the following article I posted on this forum:

These coins do not appear to be comparable. The photo of the first coin is of low quality, but it appears to be of a lightly worn and possibly dipped or "cleaned" coin with little or no mint luster. The second photo is of much higher quality and appears to be of a highly lustrous and original uncirculated coin that would likely grade "65" or higher and would be of much greater value. The second coin shows evidence of contact on the high points, not "rub" or wear like the first coin. Then again, at least part of the difference may be due to the photos. I must reiterate that you need to compare actual coins, not photos of varying quality!

Open the link NGC Coin Holders | Holders for Coin Protection | NGC for information on the various types of NGC holders. The Mega Holder is for single oversized coins or medals. You are referring to a multi-coin holder. In the future you might want to submit this type of inquiry on the "Ask NGC/NCS" portion of the chat board or contact NGC Customer Service during business hours.

This coin seems to have VF or so details--even uncirculated 1921 Peace dollars are often weak in the centers--but it has a very unnatural looking surface, suggesting it has been harshly cleaned and/or buffed. You shouldn't "like" it! (On NGC certificate verification it is included with those graded "Poor" and valued at $100.) AdamWL's Seated half dollar is a nice example of a circulated older silver coin with original surfaces. You should always buy the best coin you can afford, especially if it is a coin that is widely available in a variety of grades such as a 1921 Peace dollar. I sometimes knowingly buy impaired coins if I think the coin is still decent looking, the price is right, and an unimpaired specimen with a similar amount of detail would be too expensive or likely too hard to find. September's Coin World lists 1921 Peace dollars at $155 in VF 20, $210 in EF 40. I don't know what the seller of this severely impaired one is asking, but if I were you, I'd save up for the best unimpaired (or at least less impaired) one I could afford.

The photos are poor, but on magnification--click the photo--the ribbon does point down as it would have to on a genuine 1877-S trade dollar, or any trade dollar dated 1877 or thereafter, all of which were struck with the "Type 2" obverse and reverse. (See the Redbook.)