Sandon

@Dang vang has posted four topics in this forum, not including this one. In the first topic, entitled "/Sacagawea Golden Dollar Coin" (July 8), he inquired about the different reverse designs of Sacagawea/Native American dollars, which forum members apparently answered to his satisfaction. In the second topic, entitled "1 cent" (July 21) and originally posted in the NGC Registry forum, he posted an NGC PhotoVision Plus image of a 2005 Lincoln cent whose obverse bears the reversed and incuse image of what is apparently the reverse of a 2014 Great Sand Dunes quarter! (How could these dies even have been in use at the mint at the same time?) The reverse bears other unidentifiable extraneous impressions. His question was, "What do you guy think about this coin is it resemble to error" [sic]. NGC had, of course, correctly identified this piece as "damaged to resemble error". After another forum member had identified the cause of the anomaly as a "vice job" in which the Lincoln cent had been intentionally squeezed against the quarter after both coins had left the mint, I commented in a post that this was "a good example of why you should learn how to identify likely genuine and significant mint errors before spending your hard-earned money sending them to grading services" and provided links to a number of educational articles about mint errors on the NGC website and to error-ref.com. He asked no further questions on this topic. In the third topic, entitled "5 cent" (also July 21) and also originally posted on the NGC Registry forum, he posted photos of a (2005) "Ocean in View" nickel with a reverse bearing the reversed and incuse image of a Lincoln cent Memorial reverse and a seemingly blank obverse. His question was, "Could this be breakages coin"? [sic] Presumably, what he meant was, "Is this coin an example of a brockage?" Two of our more experienced members replied that the coin appeared to have been intentionally altered by squeezing the reverse of a struck Lincoln cent against the Ocean in View nickel. I stated that "this item does not appear to be a genuine brockage or other mint error and is likely an intentional alteration" and provided a link to the photos and explanations of genuine examples of brockages on error-ref.com. All of these examples are, of course, of coins struck from dies of the same denomination, as brockages result from struck coins or other material adhering to dies of the same die pair during striking. He asked no further questions on this topic either. In the fourth topic, repetitively entitled "1 cent" (July 24), he posted photos of the obverse of a 2018-D Lincoln cent bearing the image (again, telltale reversed and incuse) of the central obverse of a State or National Parks Washington quarter and the question, "what do you think about this coin"? Over the next day, I and four other members identified this as another "vice job" intentionally created outside of the mint. As it seems beyond the realm of possibility that anyone could "find" this many coins bearing the same types of intentional alterations, I asked him where he had found all of these altered coins and stated that I hoped he was not making them himself. Two other members suggested that this might be the case. He made no reply until September 29, over two months later, when he posted a series of inarticulate and offensive replies on the fourth topic. He now contends that he was "only asking for help and guidance" and, if I understand correctly, that we "are trying to deceive and mislead others." We are simply volunteers who donate our time and knowledge to help newer collectors. How did we not provide him with "help and guidance" in providing our unchallenged opinions that his coins were alterations? Did he bother to look at the resources to which I provided links? Did he ask detailed questions to which we could have more directly responded? There may be a language barrier involved, for which we are not responsible. You have to ask understandable questions for us to be able to answer them. Nor are we responsible for bad advice allegedly given by a dealer. If he had asked us about the altered 2005 Lincoln cent before submitting it to NGC, I would have advised him not to submit it. If by some miracle he did find all three of these pieces in circulation in their existing condition, I regret any suggestion to the contrary.

Your photos didn't post on my computer, only the file names ending with "Picture 3 of 3" and "Picture 2 of 3", which I assume include the name of the item you are quizzing the forum about. I won't name them in case others can see the photos as intended.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. When NGC gives a "star" grade to a coin submitted in the hope of receiving a "cameo" or similar designation, it usually means that the coin qualified for the designation on one side but not the other. The reverse of this proof half sovereign appears to have less contrast between the fields and devices than the obverse, resulting in the "star" instead of "cameo" designation. I wouldn't spend more money hoping that the graders will be less strict this time around.

Although there are aspects of the coin that I can't see well from the photos, based on what I can see and my experience with grading service grading, I would give this 1921 Peace dollar an approximate grade of MS 62. The coin appears to be uncirculated, without many abrasions, but is dull and has unattractive "toning"--we used to call it tarnish--spots. If you find a coin unattractive, you generally shouldn't buy it. The only exception for me would be if the coin is truly rare and so hard to find that I might never have an opportunity to buy another. This wouldn't be true in the case of a 1921 Peace dollar, a large portion of whose million-coin mintage still exists, including many nicer looking ones. I think that they are currently overpriced in non-gem uncirculated grades and would consider settling for a decent looking XF or AU, especially one that is well-struck for this high relief issue that is often flat at the centers. My own coin, acquired uncertified some years ago for around $200, has uncirculated details with a better than usual strike, and was lightly but not unattractively "cleaned". I have no intention of replacing it.

Although historically the Philadelphia mint made all U.S. dies and shipped those for use at branch mints to those facilities, the Denver mint has made some dies since 1996. (See 2023 "Redbook" at p. 22.) I'm not sure about San Francisco or West Point. Presumably, the models are still kept and master dies still made at the Philadelphia mint. At one time the mints operated mills that transformed blocks of metal into rolls of "strip" and then punched out and finished the planchets for at least some denominations, but I understand that planchets are now procured from private companies. I was fortunate enough to have visited the Philadelphia mint in 1976 and observed the mill in operation. By my next visit in or about 1983 the mill had been shut down, but I recall that the mint was still upsetting the rims of and annealing at least some of the planchets. @RWB, I'm sure, has more information on this topic. Regarding the disparity in the third-party grading of "P" and "D" mint coins, I have observed that the "D" coins in uncirculated coin ("mint") sets of recent years tend to be of higher quality than the "P" mint coins.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Cents of this era are composed of a 95% copper, 5% zinc alloy. (Beginning in the latter part of 1982 the composition changed to nearly pure zinc electroplated with copper.) These alloys are chemically active and darken or corrode due to exposure to substances they encounter in circulation. Coins that are discolored are generally disfavored by knowledgeable collectors, who in the case of modern coins like a 1978 Lincoln cent seek uncirculated examples with their original bright mint color and luster. If you thought that this coin might be some sort of mint error such as a coin struck on a wrong composition planchet, please be advised that such pieces are extremely rare, and there is virtually no chance that you would find one in circulation. As in 1978 there had been no recent composition change in the cent that would result in the possibility a planchet (coin blank) of the same size of a different composition being around the mint production floor, it is extremely unlikely that a wrong composition cent of the correct size could have been accidentally produced.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The numeral "8" in the date on your 1968-D Roosevelt dime appears to be normally shaped for a dime of that year, with some flattening acquired over its decades in circulation. Here is a photo of the obverse of a nearly uncirculated example of the same issue, showing the same shape for the "8". I'm not sure what you find unusual about the obverse of the quarter. If you're referring to the circular scrapes through the bottoms of some of the lettering and the mintmark, this is almost certainly damage from a roll wrapping machine. Contrary to what you may have read on the internet, it is extremely unusual to find any significant mint error coin in circulation. I've been collecting coins and checking change for over fifty years, and in all that time the only error coins I have found are a blank cent planchet and a couple of broadstruck quarters, each worth at most a few dollars. What print and online resources have you consulted to learn about coins?

1854 Type 2 gold dollar, NGC graded AU 53: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

@Bridgett Mouton--Welcome to the NGC chat board. When you have a question about a coin, please post it as a new topic instead of as a reply to someone else's topic. It will get better attention from forum members. Additionally, please crop your photos so that they show primarily the coin and not the surface surrounding it. Your 1965 Washington quarter was damaged after it left the mint. The edge was probably beaten repeatedly with a heavy hammer or other tool to create the raised edge. There is no way that this appearance could be created during the production process at the mint. The surfaces have also been scraped, to the point that the outer, copper-nickel layer has been removed from the obverse ("heads" side), partly exposing the copper core.

Mass marketers like "The American Heritage Mint" sold these 'reprocessed" plated 1943 steel cents to the general public because those with original surfaces looked like this after just a little time in circulation: This is a nicer example of an original circulated piece, grading XF-AU with no rust. The zinc coating has turned dark gray, and the coating has worn away from the high points such as Lincoln's cheek, exposing bare steel. They are worth about fifty cents retail in this condition but are still more desirable to a knowledgeable collector than a piece with an artificial, plated surface.

This 1943-S cent definitely isn't "double struck", which would create multiple images of most or all of the numbers, letters and devices on both sides. Before the early 1990s mint marks were punched by hand into each die. Sometimes the punch was shifted slightly in position between blows, resulting in the die producing coins with repunched mintmarks, also known as "RPMs". A double struck coin is classified as a mint error, while a coin with a repunched mintmark is classified as a die variety. (A mint error is one of a kind, while a die variety usually exists on each coin struck from the affected die.) We can tell that the coin was plated after it left the mint because of its unnatural shine and because it is bright notwithstanding obvious wear. An uncirculated 1943 zinc coated steel cent is bright but has frosty luster and is not shiny like this. A circulated example like this is usually a dark gray color, sometimes with patches of red rust where the zinc coating has worn off. Years ago, many circulated examples were plated in a misguided effort to make them more saleable. Because the original zinc coating was not applied to the edge of the coin, the edge of an original example in any condition is normally somewhat dull and shouldn't be bright or shiny. Here are photos of an original 1943 zinc coated steel cent, PCGS graded MS 66, which show the full detail and the bright and frosty but not shiny surfaces of an uncirculated example.

If I understand the inquiry correctly, your supposition seems to be that grading services are more likely to designate circulated coins "cleaned" than uncirculated coins. In my experience, this is not true. I have seen numerous coins designated "Uncirculated Details-Cleaned" for the usual reasons--extensive hairline scratches due to being scrubbed with an abrasive object or substance or an unnatural shine or color or blotches due to treatment with chemicals. The grading services numerically grade both circulated and uncirculated silver coins that have likely been "dipped" to remove "toning" if the "dipping" was done properly, although "dipping" apparently tends to reduce the numerical grade of uncirculated pieces. However, pieces that have been "dipped" for too long or too many times, resulting in a dull or "washed out" appearance are usually designated "cleaned". I understand that many of the gold coins recovered from the S.S. Central America and other deep-water shipwrecks were encrusted with deposits that had not chemically bonded with the coin metal and were removed by some (proprietary?) process that allegedly did not physically or chemically alter the coin metal. Such processes are termed "conservation" rather than "cleaning" and are considered acceptable, although in my opinion some of these gold coins look "too good to be true."

Unfortunately, it's not really "odd", but both coins have been polished.

I see no indication of an overdate on this coin, nor has any been reported for any Peace dollar. The dates on these coins were included in the master dies, and an overdate could only have been created by impressing the die with "hubs" from the different years, which in the case of the 1921 would be of the "high relief" design of that year and affect other parts of the obverse. The obverse does not appear to have either the "matte" or "satin" finish (two different finishes) of certain extremely rare pieces dated 1921 and 1922 as illustrated in PCGS Coinfacts either. See 1922 $1 Matte Finish-Low Relief (Proof) Peace Dollar - PCGS CoinFacts, 1922 $1 Satin Finish-Low Relief (Proof) Peace Dollar - PCGS CoinFacts and similar pieces dated 1921. To what "die markers" are you referring, and what numismatic reference work identifies and illustrates them as such?

It is interesting how many older U.S. coins can be found overseas, many perhaps taken back with them by nineteenth visitors who kept them as souvenirs and immigrants who came to make some money and eventually returned to the "old country", taking their savings with them. I agree that none of these coins would be worthy of third-party grading, although one of the 1884s, the 1885, and the 1887 appear to grade About Uncirculated, with retail values of around $85-$125. The 1861 has the "Type I" obverse used on all 1860 coins and apparently a minority of 1861s, though not rare. The 1869 is a somewhat better date (this one XF details with a staple scratch), as is the 1858-O (VF). Your photos also include a VF or so 1873 "close 3" copper nickel three cent piece, scarcer than the "open 3" variety of that year.

1857-O Seated half dollar, uncertified, my grade AU details, "cleaned", but still quite nice:

Most collectors would find this kind of "toning" or discoloration undesirable. Many people stored these sets in humid or otherwise inappropriate environments, which caused or accelerated this discoloration. However, both of these sets are quite common, so you should be able to find nicer ones if you look around. I recommend in-person inspection at coin shows or shops.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. If you are a new collector who has not acquired sufficient knowledge to determine the likely grade range and value of coins yourself, the last thing you should be thinking about is submitting coins to grading services. Unless a coin has a value of at least several hundred dollars, it makes no financial sense to do so. Based on your photos, your 1966 Roosevelt dime, of which well over a billion pieces were minted, appears to have light wear on the high points, but assuming that it would achieve an uncirculated grade would have to be awarded a minimum grade of either MS 68 or MS 67 FT (full torch) to have a retail value anywhere over $100 based on the NGC Price Guide. See Roosevelt Dimes (1946-Date) | Price Guide & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). Coins made for circulation are quite scarce in such grades, and based on the photos yours would clearly not qualify. The weakness in the motto would tend to reduce the grade and value, as the quality of a coin's strike is an element of its grade. (A minor grease filled die is generally considered an example of poor quality control and not a mint error.) What books and other resources have you consulted to learn about coins?

1853 "Arrows & Rays" Seated half dollar, PCGS graded XF 45:

1844 Seated half dime (repunched date variety, FS-301), NGC graded MS 63: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

The chip in the "D" mintmark is post-mint damage from a scrape or hit. (A filled "D" would be missing the opening inside the "D".) The "line at the top of his head" is a deep scrape. Note the displaced metal piled up along the sides. A "strikethrough" from foreign matter on the planchet or die when the coin was struck that could cause such a depression would not leave such displaced metal. Scrapes of this kind are frequently left by coin roll wrapping machines. However long the coin was in a glass case, it appears to be lightly circulated, with wear on the high points of Washington's hair, as well as many contact marks and nicks.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I assume that there was no estate appraisal of the coins, notes and other collectibles to which you could refer to determine their value. The 1918 cent you posted is common and worth less than ten cents retail due to wear and surface damage, but nowadays wheat reverse Lincoln cents (1909-1958) are almost always saleable for at least a few cents each, with some being worth much more. A 1909-S V.D.B. would be worth several hundred dollars even in the condition of the 1918 you show. Bear in mind that any U.S. dimes, quarters and half dollars dated through 1964 are composed of 90% silver and at today's silver price of $21.14 per troy ounce are worth 15.4 times their face value in silver alone. Traditional silver dollars, last minted and issued in 1935, are also composed of 90% silver and were struck on a heavier weight standard and contain $16.45 each in silver at today's price. Five cent pieces dated from 1942 through 1945 with the large P, D, or S mintmark above Monticello and half dollars dated from 1965 through 1970 also contain some silver, $1.20 worth per five cent piece and $3.15 worth per half dollar. See U.S. Silver Coin Melt Values | Silver Dollar Melt Value | NGC (ngccoin.com) for daily silver values of each of these coins. Without knowing how the coins are currently stored, I can't venture an opinion as to whether they should be transferred to other holders or containers to avoid deterioration over the next year or so. The mylar flips you were shown may now cost $15 or more per pack of 50--30 cents per flip--and would cost more than some of the coins are worth. If the coins are worn, they should be safe stored together in clean plastic food storage bags for that time. Uncirculated or higher value coins would best be in individual, mylar or hard plastic holders. Avoid touching all but the edges of the coins with your bare hands. This is particularly important for uncirculated copper coins with original "red" mint color, which skin oils can easily cause to spot or discolor. It will be difficult for you to evaluate the individual coins fully without knowledge of how to identify them by date, mint, major variety and grade. I recommend that if you do not wish to obtain professional assistance you obtain a current (2024) or recent edition of A Guide Book of United States Coins, also known as the "Redbook", to obtain some basic knowledge in these regards. The first post in the following topic describes these and other basic print and online coin resources and how to obtain them:

I have been reluctant to comment on this topic for several reasons. First of all, the title seems to ask not whether the coin exhibits a doubled die but whether it is "Class V doubling or pivoted hub doubling" as though these were different phenomena, when they are different names for the same type of doubled die. There are eight classes of doubled dies (I-VIII, each with a different name), which as stated in The Cherrypickers' Guide to Rare Varieties (4th ed. 2001) Vol.1 at xxiii "do not have anything to do with the strength of the doubling, but rather how the particular doubling occurred. (Emphasis in original.) The descriptions of the eight classes take up 23 pages later in the book (pp. 338-361). In my experience, very few variety collectors really understand the differences between the various classes, and it is usually unimportant. What is important, especially for a new or intermediate collector, is to be able to distinguish a doubled die of any class from other types of (generally worthless) doubling or no doubling at all. In this case, the issue is whether this well-worn (Good 6 or so) 1917 Lincoln cent is an example of the FS-101 1917 Lincoln cent doubled die obverse listed in the "Redbook", NGC VarietyPlus, and other standard guides. Notwithstanding the popularity of this variety, it is a relatively minor doubled die in terms of the width of the "spread" and obviousness of the doubling even on higher grade examples. I have seen a number of worn 1917 cents that appeared to have thickening on the date numerals and other elements that could be taken to be an indication of the doubling, but the thickening could have resulted just from wear. There is no clear separation of images on this coin to match with the photos of the diagnostic areas of high-grade examples. The coin may or may not have been struck from the FS-101 dies. In my opinion, the coin is just too worn to attribute. It is uncertain whether any reputable grading service would do so. Last March a member posted in the following topic images of an Extremely Fine or so 1917 cent that appeared to me and others to be the doubled die variety, but there was some controversy even about that one.

1853 half dime with arrows, PCGS graded MS 62: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

The circulated 1941-D and 1944-D cents in your initial post are examples of coins that have been improperly "cleaned" or polished, giving them an unnatural and undesirable color and shine. The 1941 would be technically composed of bronze (95% copper, 5% tin and zinc). From 1944 to 1946, expended cartridge cases were purportedly salvaged to obtain metal to mint cents, resulting in a slightly different composition (95% copper, 5% zinc) that was technically brass because it contained no zinc. However, there is no discernible difference between the normal appearance of circulated or uncirculated coins in either composition. All of the metals contained in these cents are chemically active and acquire various colorations in circulation. Only even light to dark chocolate colors are considered natural and desirable by collectors for circulated coins. The coins in the photo in your second post that are very dark or have greenish patches or pitting would be considered to be corroded or otherwise environmentally damaged and undesirable. FYI, here are photos of an original, full red uncirculated 1940 cent that PCGS graded MS 65 RD. Although the coin can't be fully appreciated from the photos, note the full, sharp details on Lincoln's cheek and the wheat lines and the bright and frosty (but not shiny) orange color that is quite different from that of the coins in your initial photos.