Sandon

2016-S Cumberland Gap clad quarter, NGC graded PF 69UCAM:

And we don't consult them either! Why not just call them what the mint called them--Special Mint Sets!

Let's take a look at the earlier, relatively common dates of circulation issue three cent nickels, beginning with the initial issues of 1865 and 1866. Based upon the mintage figures stated in recent editions of the "Redbook", the mint produced a total of 31,332,527 three cent nickels for circulation from 1865 through 1889. Of this total, 23,350,000--nearly three quarters--were minted in and presumably dated 1865, 1866, 1867, and 1868. As noted in my initial post in this topic, these coins tend to be of lower quality, exhibiting weak strikes, die cracks and breaks, and clash marks. The lines in the Roman numeral "III" are often incomplete even on pieces of this era in higher mint state grades. The 1865 issue has the highest reported mintage at 11,382,000 pieces, by itself over 36.3% of all three cent nickels struck for circulation. As expected, it is the most common issue. I included photos of the MS 64 graded example from my collection in my initial post for this topic. NGC and PCGS graded submissions total 6,056, and NGC has "details" graded an additional 500 submissions. Most of these submissions have been graded between MS 62 and MS 64, with "67" being the highest grade awarded by either service--five pieces each at NGC and PCGS. Uncertified pieces in the full range of circulated grades and lower end mint state grades, which aren't worth the cost of third-party grading, undoubtedly outnumber the certified ones by many multiples. These late Civil War era coins can be found at nearly every coin shop and show, often in quantity, mostly in stapled 2x2s and flips, and low-end pieces loose in "junk boxes". They can still be obtained for $20 or so in Very Good condition to $65 or so in AU 50. The 1866 issue has the second highest reported mintage, 4,801,000. less than 42% of the 1865 mintage. NGC and PCGS combined have numerically graded 2,318 submissions, and NGC reports 216 "details" graded submissions. More or less consistently with the lower mintage, the numerically graded submissions are only about 38.3% of the 1865s. As with the 1865s, however, most of the coins submitted grade between MS 62 and MS 64, lower grade pieces usually being considered unworthy of submission. NGC has graded a single coin MS 68, one of only four circulation strike three cent nickels in the entire series to achieve this exceptional grade. The highest grade at PCGS is MS 67+, also for a single coin. Like the other earlier dates, nice circulated uncertified 1866 three cent nickels are also quite inexpensive and easy to find. Although I already had a low-end uncirculated example of the 1866 in my album, I got a good deal at an auction last March on this NGC graded MS 64 example: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries. This coin is relatively attractive for the issue but exhibits the typical clash marks and weakness on the lines of the "III". The obverse appears to have been struck from dies that were rusted or had some foreign matter adhering to portions of Liberty's face. All 1866 three cent nickels, as well as 1866 Shield nickels, show the second "6" in the date appearing to be slightly taller and narrower than the first "6".

I didn't mean to imply that you intended to mislead anyone or that you originated the term "SMS" to describe these coins. Both the Redbook and Coin World describe them as "satin finish". I think that "matte finish", which I have also seen used, is acceptable, as "matte" has been defined as "a dull, often rough finish, as on glass, metal or paper." (American Heritage Dictionary at 805 (1973)). I disagree with the usage of "SMS" for them by the grading services for the reasons I previously stated.

The mint called and labeled the sets it issued in lieu of proof and uncirculated coin sets from 1965 through 1967 "Special Mint Sets". They contain coins that are usually at least somewhat prooflike. The 2005 to 2010 sets were simply sold by the mint as "uncirculated coin sets" but contain coins that have a somewhat coarser or "matte-like" finish than those issued for circulation and are accurately referred to as "satin finish" or "matte finish" uncirculated. They look nothing like the 1965-67 SMS coins. I think it is misleading to refer to any coins other than those from the 1965-67 sets as "SMS". This includes the so-called 1964 "SMS" coins, whose origins are undetermined. To @Erin33: The term "FS" means "full steps" (5 or 6), not "a full set of stairs". Full steps are usually the norm on uncirculated pieces from 2006 to date, whose obverse is in lower relief than on the 1938-2003 design, allowing the steps to strike up better. Most of the issues in the Jefferson nickel series that are valuable with "full steps" are dated from 1951 to 1970. Based on the photos, your 2006-D nickel would probably grade approximately MS 63 and have a retail value of about 50 cents if a circulation issue and $3 if a "matte finish" issue from an uncirculated coin set.

It is generally irrelevant to subsequent owners what dealer may have previously sold a coin to someone else. More valuable coins that were once owned by famous collectors such as Garrett, Eliasberg, or Norweb sometimes have the provenance (famous owner's name) noted on the grading service holder. The Heritage we know about (ha.com) is a major company that usually sells coins (and other collectibles) at auction, although they also do some direct sales. Most of the coins they sell are in grading service holders and are much more valuable than what you have shown us, which appear to be inexpensive groups of coins sold by mass marketers to the general public through television and periodical ads. Perhaps they came from a bulk consignment to Heritage and were sold in groups. There is nothing on the portions of the holders you have shown indicating that the holders originated with Heritage.

Matte proof Lincoln cents were issued for sale to collectors only from 1909 through 1916. They aren't "shiny" but instead have a duller, coarser finish than regular issue coins, a very strong strike, high broad rims, and squared off edges. I happen to own this mediocre (PCGS graded PR 63 BN) 1912: The coins you posted are all circulated (Very Fine to Extremely Fine) regular issues that have been improperly "cleaned" with chemicals or polish, resulting in an unnatural shine, pebbly surfaces, and an unnatural color or uneven toning. They are worth at most a few cents each. If these were among the coins you were planning on submitting to NGC for $23 or more each in grading fees alone, please don't!

If your coin is dated before 1965, you may submit it under the "Economy" tier if its market value in the grade range you expect it to receive should not exceed $300, whose grading fee is $23 per coin. If such value is likely to be more than $300 but not more than $3,000, it should be submitted under the "Standard" tier for a $40 per coin grading fee. There are higher and more expensive tiers for coins of even greater values. See NGC Services and Fees | NGC (ngccoin.com). The higher tiers also have faster turn-around times. If NGC finds a coin to be worth significantly more than the highest allowed value for the tier in which you submitted it, you will be charged the grading fee for the tier in which it should have been submitted. (This happened to me once.) Frankly, if you don't have sufficient knowledge about your coins and the grades that they would likely achieve to determine reasonable values for your coins, you have no business submitting them to a grading service without professional advice. You should either consult with and submit them through an NGC authorized dealer who has advised you that their submission would be worthwhile or refrain from submitting coins until you have gained sufficient knowledge and experience. To locate a dealer, see Find Coin Shops & Dealers | Coin Dealer Locator | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The NGC Registry forum is for topics and questions relating to the registry, not for questions regarding submissions of coins to NGC. If you wanted a response from the NGC staff, you should have posted it in the "Ask NGC/NCS" forum. You could also have posted it in the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum for better attention from chat board participants. It appears that NGC will not check or attribute your coins for mint errors unless you so indicate on the Submission Form and pay the error attribution fees as well as grading fees. As NGC states regarding the selection of mint error attribution on the "Services and Fees" page, "NGC examines mint errors and assigns an appropriate designation. Also, choose a grading tier according to coin value and desired turnaround. The Mint Error fee [$18 per coin] applies when requested regardless of whether NGC determines the coin to be a recognized mint error." NGC Services and Fees | NGC (ngccoin.com). (Emphasis added.) Therefore, unless you are reasonably sure that a specific coin exhibits a mint error of a type that NGC will attribute and of sufficient value to make the fee worthwhile, you should not request this service unless you like wasting money. I assume that you have adequate coin grading and valuation skills to determine whether your coins have sufficient value to make them worth submitting to a grading service in the first place.

Significant mint errors are rarely found in circulation. If you are lucky enough to find one, you are likely to notice it at a glance. To see what the various types of errors look like, see the following: Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 1 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 2 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 3 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 4 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com) and other topics that are shown when "mint errors" is entered in the search bar on the NGC home page. For a comprehensive listing and description of mint errors, see error-ref.com.

I was mistaken that there is no known example of a 1971-D Kennedy half dollar struck on a silver clad planchet. Even after over fifty years collecting, one still has something to learn. This one hasn't been much publicized, as I could find no mention of it on PCGS Coinfacts, the NGC Coin Explorer, or the deluxe edition of the Redbook. Does anyone know how many are known to exist? You should never expose a coin you think may be valuable to any abrasive surface, including a toothbrush, or to any chemical (even soap) other than a solvent that removes foreign matter without reacting with the coin metal such as acetone. Collectors today value originality above all, and a coin with noticeable "hairlines" from being brushed or with an unnatural color or texture due to chemical treatment will be described as "cleaned" and given a "details" instead of a numerical grade by the grading services. Such coins can be difficult to sell and trade at a discount that varies with the perceived severity of the "cleaning". Hopefully, if this coin does turn out to have been struck on a silver clad planchet, it will not be described as "cleaned". If a specific gravity test suggests that the coin has a 40% silver composition, the XRF (x-ray fluorescence) test would be in order. NGC uses the XRF method for metallurgical analysis. See NGC Launches New Metallurgic Analysis Service | NGC (ngccoin.com). I continue to have serious doubts based on what I see in your photos, including the coin's color, but let's see how it turns out.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. It would be helpful if you would post, clear cropped photos of each side of the coin that show the coin much closer and so not show much of the surface on which it sits. Close up photos of all of its edge would also be helpful in these circumstances. I'll answer your question, but first please understand that we have had numerous people claim on these forums to have found coins struck on wrong metal planchets, including pieces that are extremely rare but are known to exist, such as 1943 bronze cents and 1974-D or 1977-D 40% silver Eisenhower dollars, as well as pieces that are not known to exist, including 40% silver 1971-D Kennedy half dollars. To my knowledge, all of these claimants have invariably been wrong. Such wrong metal pieces as do exist are generally found within a few years of a coin's issuance. Your coin is 52 years old, and no genuine silver clad example has ever been reported to my knowledge. The odds of your coin being a discovery specimen after so many years are slim and nil. The apparent lack of copper color on the edge is not much evidence, as the coin could have been plated or the edge tampered with. Have you weighed this coin on a properly calibrated, good quality digital scale that measures to at least hundredths of a gram? The official weight of a silver clad Kennedy half dollar is 11.50 grams, while that of a copper-nickel clad example is 11.34 grams. Although the respective allowed "plus or minus" tolerances of 0.400 and 0.454 grams mean that the weight would not be dispositive either, if your coin weighs closer to 11.34 grams than 11.50 grams, it is in all likelihood of the normal copper-nickel clad composition. If you are insistent upon submitting this coin to NGC, please carefully review the various topics under the "Submit" tab of the NGC home page, including, but not limited to "How to Submit," "Coins We Grade & Policies," and "Services & Fees". (To submit to other reputable services such as PCGS (pcgs.com) or ANACS (anacs.com), see the instructions on their websites.) NGC requires a paid membership to submit coins, as does PCGS. You will then have to fill out the submission form, including the choice of a "tier" based upon your estimated value of the coin and how quickly you want it to be returned. I recommend the "Modern" ($19 grading fee) tier, although in the unlikely event NGC finds the coin to be silver clad, NGC could charge you a higher tier fee based upon NGC's assessment of a market value higher than the $3,000 limit for the Modern tier. You will also have to pay an $18 "Mint Error" attribution fee, a $10 processing fee, a minimum $28 return shipping fee, and your cost to have the coin shipped to NGC. It would appear that this coin would also require the payment of the $75 "metallurgic analysis fee" to authenticate. You may wish to contact NGC after the holiday to discuss this and any other questions you may have. You will likely be wasting your time and money, but it is yours to waste. Please let us know how it turns out.

1939 "Mercury" dime, now NGC graded PF 67 (the highest grade I've received on a coin I submitted):

This 1871 three cent silver piece, PCGS graded AU 53, is one of the rare post-1862 issues. It has a reported circulation strike mintage of 3,400, many of which were presumably never released and melted down after the coinage of silver three cent coins was abolished in 1873. I obtained it for below list values at an August 2023 auction. This coin looks much better than its photos, courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries. Instead of being dull as suggested by the photos, it is attractively toned with semi-prooflike surfaces beneath the toning, notwithstanding some dark toning spots. I attempted to take better photos, but the glare reflected by the plastic of the grading service holder prevented my obtaining a satisfactory image.

Although based on the photos both coins appear to be mint state, I can't really estimate a numerical grade for either or be sure that either coin isn't really Ch. AU and/or "cleaned" without being able to examine them in person from different angles and at different magnification levels. I try not to base a judgment about a coin on colorful toning as on the 1885, which I sometimes like but always bear in mind may be artificially contrived. I would prefer the 1904 as a coin to hold onto because it is far less common than the 1885. The NGC Census shows 96,350 submissions of 1885s (including PL and DPL) numerically graded in all grades versus 5,854 1904s. PCGS Population Report data is similar, with 86,957 submissions of 1885s versus 7,759 1904s. The 1885s also tend to come in higher grades, with the modal (most common) grade awarded being "64" for the 1885 and "63" for the 1904. The 1904 is often dull and indifferently struck. This one looks rather nice for the date. Even if it is an AU, it might be more worth keeping than the 1885.

Although it is remotely possible that a 1967 Kennedy half dollar could have been struck from a leftover 90% silver blank, the core of a normal silver clad piece is still about 21% silver and may show little difference in color from the 80% silver outer layer when the edge hasn't been handled enough to cause the copper in the alloy to darken. Most of the edge on your coin does in fact show a yellowish tinge that isn't present near where the edge meets either the obverse or the reverse. The only way to tell for sure would be to weigh the coin on a properly calibrated digital scale that is accurate to at least the nearest tenth (preferably hundredth) of a gram.

No, it stands for Special Mint Set. As I understand it, a dealer named Lester Merkin had sets of supposedly specially struck 1964 Philadelphia mint coins in all denominations that he had apparently obtained from Eva Adams, the then Director of the Mint, or some other mint employee. See 1964 50C SMS (Special Strike) Kennedy Half Dollar - PCGS CoinFacts. Although grading services have certified a number of these supposedly special strikes, and they have sold for high prices, some such as @RWB maintain that they are just regular strikes from new production dies and that there is nothing "special" about them at all.

Your 1848 large cent definitely isn't an N4. On your coin the 1, the 8 and the right upright of the 4 touch the bust, whereas on the N4 they don't, as shown on this photo of an N4 from NGC VarietyPlus: Additionally, as I understand it, although a Rarity 4 variety is considered scarce, a large cent variety must be at least Rarity 5 to be considered rare. I think that @JT2 is correct about your coin being an N3. See Braided Hair Cents (1839-1857) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). There are over forty varieties of 1848 large cents, but, without looking at all of them, the N3 appears to be an exact match.

I'm glad you didn't take any offense, Hoghead. My late mother continually corrected everyone's spelling, grammar, and diction; and I can't help but do it as well. I don't know whether it's hereditary or just out of habit. A member of my local coin club also transposes the last two letters of the word "nickel" and persists in doing so even though I've politely attempted to corrected him. At times, it makes me want to scream! As the previously linked Wikipedia article indicates, Conder tokens are named after James Conder (1761-1823), who collected and initially cataloged these late eighteenth century tradesmen's tokens, which were issued due to a severe shortage of coins in Britain at that time. There are thousands of different designs. The numbers 1-72 on the left side of the chart refer to individual counties to which tokens can be attributed, with the name of the county in the second column, and the number of different token designs in the third. Just for county number 21, Middlesex, there appear to be 1,174 different types of tokens known. They were avidly collected even at the time they were issued, so there are many pieces in or near uncirculated condition. Many of these tokens were made at Matthew Boulton's Soho mint, which also supplied many planchets for early U.S. half cents and large cents.

This is a great topic, @Hoghead515, but I think that they're called Conder tokens, not Condor tokens. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conder_token. Condors are large vulture-like birds found in California and the Andes. I don't know whether there are any Conder tokens that depict a condor.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please crop your photos so that they show only the coin and not mostly the surrounding surface. A photo of the coin's edge might also be helpful. Based on what I can see from the current photos, it appears that both the obverse and reverse of the coin have been mostly planed off after the coin left the mint, either to test a tool or in a crude effort to make it appear as though the coin were a weak strike or other mint error.

1935 Peace dollars, NGC graded MS 63:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your photo shows four 1926 Lincoln cents, a 1926-D, and a 1929-S. All of the coins are heavily circulated, and most are corroded and/or damaged. None of these coins would have a retail value of more than approximately twenty-five cents. Dealers might pay five to ten cents apiece for them.

Your 1915-D Lincoln cent appears to exhibit a relatively minor die rotation. There isn't much demand for this type of error, so it would only be worth a small (perhaps a few dollar) premium over the underlying value of the coin. Another recent topic concerns a 1970-D quarter that was struck with a full 180-degree (medallic alignment) rotation, but, as we have tried to explain to that poster, even a coin with that degree of rotation, while a nice circulation find, isn't particularly valuable.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. As others have stated, your 2007-D Utah quarter exhibits severe surface damage, not a mint error. Here are some examples of die breaks or cracks on earlier U.S. coins, which always appear as raised lines or areas, not gouges as on your coin: This 1818 large cent (N10, Randall hoard variety) shows extensive die breaks that connect the stars and the date numerals. The reverse of this 1894 proof 1894 Liberty nickel shows light die cracks between and above the letters "TATES OF AM". This 1942-S wartime Jefferson "nickel" shows a long die crack that passes all the way from the rim above the "S" in "PLURIBUS" at the upper reverse all the way through the second "S" in "STATES" at the lower reverse to the lower rim. If the die remained in use much longer, it likely broke in two.