Sandon

No, a die crack, which isn't part of what the coin's designers and engravers intended it to look like, isn't "part of the design." It is simply a manifestation of die failure. You could also insist that a cow is a horse, but that wouldn't make it a horse.

Yes, there are several small ticks on the obverse, at least one of which is observable at certain angles to my nearsighted eyes without magnification. There are also striations on the obverse rim that are observable in the photo in the area of the date and may be "as made" but are still imperfections.

1813 Classic Head large cent, now NGC graded XF 40:

2019-W Enhanced Reverse Proof Silver American Eagle, NGC graded ER PF 70:

Any Colonial or Post-Colonial issue should do, as would any coin, token or medal dated 1787. Unfortunately, I don't have any others. Could anyone else help?

The people at ICG could be the only ones who could answer this question.

The cracks don't look exactly like the frosted devices, whose contrast I understand is enhanced during the die preparation process by (depending on the era) a nitric acid solution, sandblasting, or lasers. However, the metal that squeezed into the die crack doesn't have the mirror surface of the fields imparted either, so it contrasts with the fields. The 1958 quarter that you originally posted wouldn't qualify for a "cameo" designation, but the crack still contrasts with the field.

Unfortunately, as in many other contexts, websites vary in quality, and some sites, like the one to which you refer, include incomplete, incorrect, or misleading information. Others contain outright lies. I have never previously heard of and could find no reference to wide and close "AM" varieties for Lincoln, Memorial reverse, cents prior to 1992 in either the standard or deluxe ("Mega Red") version of the "Redbook", nor on NGC VarietyPlus, PCGS Coinfacts, doubleddie.com, nor lincolncentresource.com. See, for example, https://lincolncentresource.com/wideams.html, for an overview of the known wide and close "AM" varieties. One of the major areas of Internet disinformation about coins is that rare and valuable pieces can be found in circulation. This is only true in the sense that one can also win a billion-dollar prize in the Mega Millions or Powerball lotteries. It would be quite unusual even to find a coin worth a few dollars in your change, much less one worth hundreds or thousands of dollars. I'm in your age group but, unlike you, began collecting and studying U.S. coins over fifty years ago. I understand that it is somewhat different to begin collecting later in life. As I'm sure you have learned, however, nothing worthwhile in life can be achieved without knowledge, experience, and effort. At a bare minimum, you must acquire and study a current or recent standard "Redbook" and a grading guide and subscribe to a current price guide. You also must familiarize yourself with the appearance of genuine, unimpaired examples of the coins you want to collect. You may wish to limit your collecting to one or two series of coins or assemble a type set instead of trying to collect a broad range of coins. If you intend to spend a substantial amount of money without acquiring substantial knowledge, you should limit your purchases to coins certified by reputable third-party grading services such as NGC, PCGS, CAC Grading, and ANACS. Participants in these forums are volunteers who are trying to help educate new collectors like you. You're not bothering us, provided that you take our advice seriously.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Although it isn't possible to provide any opinion on your coin without your providing clear, cropped photos of each side of it, it is almost certainly one of the many thousands of worthless replicas of the 1776 dated Continental "dollar" sold in such places as gift and souvenir shops over the decades. Someone just posted the same question about two of these replicas the other day. See the following topic: If your piece looks like the ones whose photos are posted on this topic and not the genuine piece whose photos appear in the link that I provided to a page of the NGC Coin Explorer, you certainly wouldn't want to waste your money submitting it to NGC.

1878-CC Morgan dollar, PCGS graded MS 62, upgrading an XF-AU example purchased decades ago. This is the first Morgan dollar I've purchased for several years--the prices are moderating somewhat--and, though somewhat more blemished than the photo suggests, is still nice for the grade.

No, the large gold colored item lettered "St. Gaudens Double Eagle 1933" isn't a U.S Mint product, nor, based on the single photo provided, is it a coin of any nation. (A coin is issued by or on the authority of a government and has a stated legal tender value, whether or not it is intended to be used as money.) Some private manufacturers of novelty or souvenir items like this use the word "mint" in their names and then place disclaimers of government affiliation in tiny print in their advertisements for products like these, which frequently appear in magazines and on television. It is doubtful that this novelty item is solid gold, and it likely contains only a thin surface plating of gold or no gold at all. (If the coin did contain three troy ounces of pure gold, the value of the gold alone would currently be over $6,000.) Private companies also "gold" plate or "colorize" coins and also offer them for sale as novelties or "collectors' items" Serious and knowledgeable collectors of U.S. coins generally have no interest in such items, and they usually have little or no resale value. Do you have a current (2024, 2025 due out in April) edition of A Guide Book of United States Coins, commonly known as the "Redbook"? If you can't find an item offered for sale in that book, it is almost certainly not a legitimate U.S. Mint issue. It is the first book recommended in the "Resources for New Collectors" topic to which I referred you on another topic. You can obtain a copy from its publisher at whitman.com or at many booksellers. Edit: The photos added while I was typing the original item shows that it is a privately made novelty item, not a coin. If there is any representation that it contains any gold, it is on the edge. If it were gold, it certainly wouldn't have been offered in a $20 ebay lot!

No, from what I can see from your photo, it is not an example of a DDO (doubled die obverse) at all. This is what a coin struck from a doubled die obverse looks like, this being an example of the 1972 doubled die cent (FS-101) listed in the "Redbook" and PCGS graded MS 66 RD: Note the crisp, clear doubling on all of the obverse letters and numbers, with both images at about the same level and "notching" at the junctures of the images. Where do you see such images on the 1994-P quarter you posted?

By "get graded", you mean submitting coins to a third-party grading service. (I grade coins with the knowledge I have acquired over the years or by referring to a grading guide.) Unless you have sufficient knowledge and experience to approximately grade and otherwise evaluate your coins yourself, you will very likely spend much, much more than the coins are worth on grading fees (at NGC, minimum $19-$23 per coin plus a $18 per coin error attribution fee for coins you think are mint errors, whether they are attributed or not), processing fees ($10 per order), return shipping costs (minimum $28 per order) and your cost of shipping the coins to NGC in the first place. You need to be able to determine reasonable market values for the coins just to fill out the submission forms. So far, no coin that you have shown on the topics you have posted on this forum would be remotely worth the cost. I've been collecting and studying U.S. coins for nearly 53 years now (15 or more years longer than NGC or PCGS have been in business), so hopefully I'm qualified to provide an opinion. If you don't believe me, see this article by a prominent dealer and former president of the American Numismatic Association. Jeff Garrett: The Art of Rare Coin Submissions | NGC (ngccoin.com). Your time and money would be much better spent on books, subscriptions, and certain online resources (some free) from which you can learn, as well as attending coin shows, coin club meetings, and other venues from which you can examine a variety of coins, including third-party graded pieces, and speak with knowledgeable collectors and dealers. Please see the following forum topics: P.S. The grooves on the edge of a coin like a dime or quarter are generally referred to as a "reeds", not "ridges', and the edge is referred to as a reeded edge.

@Patriot17--Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please post questions about your own coins as new topics, not as replies to someone else's topic from a year ago. Assuming that your scale is accurate, your coin was likely struck on a slightly thin planchet, which isn't very unusual or valuable.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Mint errors and die varieties are advanced topics in numismatics and will be difficult for you to grasp unless you have more basic knowledge, including the history and types of U.S. coinage; which dates, mints, and major varieties of specific types of coins are rare; grading, basic authentication, and how coins are made. In this case, you did not know that the close and wide "AM" varieties of Lincoln cents only exist for coins dated 1992, 98, 99, and 2000 or that these are varieties, not mint errors. You also confused minor and common damage to a circulated coin with "mint errors". We have an old expression, "Buy the book before the coin!" Nowadays you can learn from certain online as well as printed resources, but beware of the disinformation that circulates on the Internet. Please refer to the following forum topics for essential and reliable resources from which you may acquire the knowledge that you will need to succeed as a collector. You will also benefit from attending coin shows, coin club meetings, and other venues where you can examine a variety of coins and speak with knowledgeable collectors and dealers.

The 1970-S nickel is likely a circulation strike (over 515 million minted). The 1974-S would have to have been a proof striking, although the proof surface has worn off. Even when I started collecting in the early 1970s, it was unusual to find anything significant in circulation, although there were more common date wheat reverse cents.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. This doesn't appear to be a coin at all. It is more likely a medal or decorative item, likely of modern origin. A photo of the other side could be helpful to identify it. If you believe that this item may have value, you should not handle it with your bare hands, except by the edge if you must. The oils in a person's skin may damage (discolor or corrode) such an item.

Please post cropped photos of each full side of this and any other coin about which you have a question. Frequently, it is impossible to render an informed opinion based on close-ups alone. ("You can't see the forest for the trees.") Based on the single, overly bright photo, this coin does not appear to be either a doubled die (a die variety created by doubled elements in the die itself) or a double strike (a mint error caused by the particular coin being struck twice). These are unrelated phenomena that generally do not resemble each other, and a double strike, like most mint errors, should be noticeable without any magnification. Your coin may not even have strike doubling or other forms of "worthless" doubling. The words "E PLURIBUS UNUM" on a 2010 to date Union Shield reverse cent are incuse (sunken instead of raised), and normal pieces may appear to have extra images around the edges due to the brightness or angle of the lighting in which they are imaged. Respectfully, you seem to be focused on advanced topics such as die varieties and mint errors. Do you have a firm grasp of more basic concepts such as the types and history of U.S coins, their grading, basic authentication, and the compositions of various coins and how coins are made? Without this basic knowledge, it may be very difficult for you to recognize or understand die varieties and mint errors. I think that you were referred to the "Basic Glossary and Resources" topic pinned at the beginning of this forum in a previous topic. You may also benefit from the resources identified in the following topic: If you must focus on mint errors and die varieties, please see error-ref.com for mint errors and, for example, doubleddie.com and varietyvista.com for die varieties, the most prominent of which are listed on NGC VarietyPlus, United States Categories | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com).

This does appear to be a repunched mintmark, of which VarietyPlus includes four different varieties for 1938-D Buffalo nickels. This one most closely resembles the FS-502 variety. See Buffalo Five Cents (1913-1938) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The rough surfaces and ill-defined details clearly identify these pieces as replicas of the sort sold by the thousands at venues such as souvenir shops over the decades. The rare genuine Continental "Dollars" look like the one shown here: 1776 PEWTER 'CURENCY' CONTINEN | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com). If you believe that a coin has collector value, you should not touch it with your bare hands except by its edge if you must.

In a custom set, you define and create the slots. Unless the Administrator, who will likely respond, knows something that I don't, you would have to create each slot separately. If you don't want to waste time or have hundreds of empty slots, you may want to create the slots as you obtain the pertinent NGC certified coins and PCGS certified U.S. coins. You could additionally or alternatively create competitive sets, which have pre-defined slots, for such pertinent series as Jefferson nickels and Washington quarters.

While the preceding post was a bit of a "reach" given that the New Jersey quarter's date wasn't 1787, although that date does appear on the coin, Idhair is the author of this topic and has some license. (We were getting "stuck" on modern pieces.) Here is a 1787 Fugio cent, PCGS graded XF Details, Environmental Damage and catalogued as of the Newman 17-S variety: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. You shouldn't have much trouble adding multiple coins to your custom set. While logged in, open your set and click the "Edit" tab. If the coins are already in your coin list, a,k.a. "My Competitive Coins", click the "Add from Inventory" tab on the right side of the page, check the box for each coin you want to add, and click the "Add Selected Coins" button at the lower left of the dialog box. You can then renumber the slots in your set so that the coins appear in the order you want. If the coins aren't already in your coin list, click "Add New" instead of "Add from Inventory" and proceed from there, or use the "Add Coin" function before opening the custom set.

I found the 1988-P quarter that I think is similar to this one and posted a separate topic about it.

@Errorists' topic 2020 S Rockefeller National Park Error Quarter - US, World, and Ancient Coins - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards inspired me to locate this anomalous 1988-P quarter that I found in circulation some years (probably several decades) ago: The first (obverse) photo shows a thickened and split rim on the right side. The rim narrows and ultimately vanishes at the left side. The second photo shows a normal reverse, some common "strike doubling" excepted. The third photo, taken from the left side of the coin relative to the obverse, shows that the outer portion of the thickened right side of the rim forms a significant "fin" that is raised well above the surface of the rest of the coin. The reeded edge is complete on both the portions of the coin without and with the "fin", except for some distortion in a small area adjacent to the reverse at the center of the portion of the edge that includes the "fin" (fourth photo). None of the edge is plain. This coin bears a significant resemblance to the 2020-S proof Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller quarter shown in Errorists' topic, except on that coin the "fin" has fractured, with part of it hanging loose, and the portion of the rim opposite the fin is significantly narrower than normal but has not vanished. I think that both of these coins were struck from significantly misaligned (tilted) obverse dies that caused a "gap" between the edge of the die and the collar, resulting in metal being allowed to flow upward against the collar during striking and creating the "fin". This tilt also explains the missing or narrowed portions of the rim on the side of the obverse opposite the fin, as the tilt caused part or all of this edge of the die to pass beyond the edge of the planchet. Errorists believes that the correct explanation is a "partial collar", but my understanding is that a coin struck in a reeded collar that has slipped or tilted should show a blank (non-reeded) area on part or all of the coin's edge. What do you think?