Sandon

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?

Although there are four varieties of 1965 Canadian cents, the only one worth a premium is the variety with large beads and a pointed top "5". Yours appears to be a common large beads, blunt 5, worth only nominal value in this worn condition. Canada Cent KM 59.1 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). As indicated in my reply to your topic regarding the 1952 cent, the "K.G." is just the designer's initials.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. This is a common 1952 Canadian cent, which has a mintage of over 67.6 million pieces and a retail list value of 20 cents or so in this circulated (worn) condition. See Canada Cent KM 41 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). The letters "K.G." appear on all Canada cents with this reverse design and identify its designer, George E. Kruger-Gray.

Please post full, cropped photos of each side of the coin as well as a much sharper closeup. From the current image, it does not appear that this coin is a match to or even resembles the 1999 Lincoln cent shown at https://www.error-ref.com/?s=mule+die+clash.

Unless you are a devoted, advanced collector of Morgan dollars by VAM (Van Allen & Mallis) die varieties, including the more obscure ones, I don't know why you are "wanting to purchase" this coin, especially if the seller is asking for a premium over a normal price for an 1878-S dollar graded MS 62. The "VAM World" website lists known varieties for 1878-S Morgan dollars numbered from 1 to 134, with some die state variants given additional designations, and a few dubious numbered varieties having been delisted. See http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1878-S_VAMs. Although ANACS has distinguished itself by attributing all VAMs, other services, such as NGC, generally only attribute the more popular VAMs, primarily those designated the "Top 100", the "Hot 50", and the "Hit List 40". See Morgan Dollars (1878-1921) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com) for the list of Morgan dollar varieties attributable by NGC, which does not include the 1878-S VAM 95. The reason that you are having difficulty finding sales records or price listings for this variety is that because of its obscurity, there aren't many recorded sales. It would be difficult to determine just what if any premium a collector of the more obscure VAMs would be willing to pay for this variety in this grade. Some collectors "cherrypick" such varieties from unattributed or uncertified coins without paying a premium.

Unfortunately, this 1889 Indian cent is well-worn ("Good" details) and corroded, so it really isn't possible to tell whether the tiny dot was imparted by the die when the coin was struck or is the result of subsequent damage or alteration. It could be just a bit of foreign matter. Someone would have to find an example in much higher grade to identify it as a die variety. No such variety for this date is listed in guides to significant varieties, for example NGC VarietyPlus, Indian Cents (1859-1909) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com).

The recesses of Lincoln's head are an area of high die stress, and cents with "cracked skulls" and the like are a frequent occurrence on pieces of most eras. If you find them interesting, feel free to collect them. Just don't act under the impression that they are some sort of rarity or have significant market value. This coin also appears to have a die crack running from the center of the truncation of Lincoln's bust to the rim, so this coin was apparently struck from a well-used obverse die. The coin appears to be uncirculated ("mint state") and full red, but if you're looking for an opinion as to what numerical grade a third-party grading service would give it, I wouldn't guess. I would really need to see the coin in hand at different lighting angles and magnifications and even then could only provide a range of three or so grades. It's almost certainly not worth submitting to a grading service (at NGC $19 grading fee alone), nor is it likely that NGC would classify the die cracks as a "mint error" (additional $18 fee whether it were so designated or not).

This is just different terminology used by the grading services, ostensibly to describe the same grade. NGC uses the term "Ultra Cameo", usually spelled out on its holders but sometimes abbreviated "UCAM", while PCGS uses "Deep Cameo", abbreviated "DCAM" on its holders. Similarly, NGC designates proof coins "PF" and PCGS "PR". A coin that NGC labeled "PF 69 ULTRA CAMEO" would be labeled by PCGS "PR69DCAM".

It's quite difficult to explain this without having you look at actual coins, but I'll try. A coin that has light "rub" from brief circulation or mishandling will show dullness instead of mint frost on the highest points of the design. This dullness may be quite hard to see when the coin is viewed "straight on" with light directly overhead. Such coins should be graded Choice AU (55-58), although they (especially pre-1837 U.S. coins) sometimes receive lower mint state grades from grading services. Coins that have never been in circulation but have been abraded by coin-to-coin contact in rolls or bags will also suffer a loss of luster on the highest points but should be shiny in those areas, not dull. Those coins should receive uncirculated grades, though obviously affected by the abrasions, although they do not have "full luster". Here is a Stacks Bowers photo of the reverse of a 1928 Peace dollar that NGC (accurately, in my opinion) graded AU 58. Note the slight dullness at the tips of some of the eagle's wing and tail feathers, which would be more obvious if I were able to show the coin at an angle: