Sandon

@Bozworth75--Although some legitimate coin dealers do sell through ebay, many of the sellers who post there have little knowledge about coins or are dishonest. Stay away from that and similar sites! In reality mint errors (and other coins) of any significant value are very rarely found in circulation. If you want to be a coin collector, you need to learn basic facts about U.S. coins, as well as about mint errors, which have traditionally been the province of advanced collectors. See the following resources: Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com) 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) The site mentioned by @Coinbuf, error-ref.com, provides a comprehensive overview of errors that may be most useful after you have learned the basics. You should also try to attend coin shows and coin club meetings, where you can see a variety of coins and learn from knowledgeable collectors and dealers.

I just inexpensively acquired this 1964 Proof Roosevelt dime, PCGS graded PR 67 CAM, solely for a twentieth century proof type registry set.

The letters to which you refer nearly touch the rim. This is entirely normal for a cent dated from the mid-1960s through 1968. The master die for the obverse of Lincoln cents had been in use since 1919. Over the years Lincoln's portrait and the lettering had spread out as the die was used to make numerous "hubs" that in turn were used to make working dies that struck coins. The problem got worse every year. The master die was finally replaced for 1969 coinage and has been replaced several times since. Your coin appears to have been struck from a slightly misaligned obverse die that accentuated the thinness of the rim at the top of the coin and widened it at the bottom. This is very common, is not regarded as a mint error, and adds no value to the coin. If you found this coin recently in circulation, it is in nice (About Uncirculated) condition for its age, though still not worth much above face value. Here is a Brilliant Uncirculated 1967 cent from my collection, NGC graded MS 65 RD. Note the same letters nearly touching the rim on this coin. @J P M--Mint marks were not used on U.S. coins dated from 1965 through 1967. A 1967 cent could have been struck at either Philadelphia or Denver., and possibly at the the San Francisco (then) Assay Office as well.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Based on what I can see, the coin is just damaged, but it would help us to better evaluate it if you would post clear, cropped photos of each side of the coin. Please review the following topic on this forum:

It does resemble a VF30-35 more than it does an XF 40 per PCGS Photograde and the ANA Grading Guide, but I've seen worse graded XF 40. The problem is less overgrading than having too many grades that are too hard to tell apart. The coin has relatively mark free surfaces, which may have influenced the graders' decision, and the color is quite normal for a circulated silver coin.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. We would need clear, cropped photos of each side of the coin to provide an opinion. (Mint marks were punched by hand into each coinage die until the early 1990s and varied in location and angle, so a slight tilt is likely meaningless.) See the following topic regarding posting questions on this forum:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. We could provide a better evaluation of these coins if you could provide clear, cropped separate photos of the obverse ("heads" side) and reverse ("tails" side) of each coin so we can determine the date, mintmark, and approximate grade (condition) of each. It appears that at least some of the coins were harshly "cleaned" or polished leaving a pebbly surface, which would adversely affect their values. Dealers generally sell any silver dollar that isn't "cleaned" or damaged nowadays for at least $35 and would probably pay at least $20-$25 for even the most common dates. This appears to be a "one of each mint" set sold by a mass marketer. The Carson City coin ("CC" on the reverse below the wreath and above "D" and "O" of DOLLAR) would be worth a premium if the coin isn't too impaired. From what I can see it would be one of the two coins that appear to be dated "1878". An 1878-CC in Fine or Very Fine condition has a retail value of $175 to $200, but I would need the separate photos of each side of the coin for a more educated opinion.

It may be helpful if you would post cropped photos showing the full obverse and reverse of this coin. Based upon what I can see, it is highly doubtful that this coin shows a D/S over-mintmark for the following reasons: 1. As @Coinbuf noted, the mint mark area is covered with patches of corrosion and/or dirt, and there appears to be damage to the lower part of the mint mark that could have pushed metal inside the mint mark, where it could be taken to be the lower loop of an "S". A coin in better condition with a clear, undamaged mint mark would be required to establish the existence of such an over-mintmark. 2. What could be taken as the lower portion of an "S" doesn't appear to match the shape of the "S" mint mark punch used on 1916-S cents, as shown by the NGC Coin Explorer photo below. This is the only style of "S" I've seen on 1916-S cents. It was also used on all 1909-1915 "S" mint cents and on some 1917-S cents as well. 3. It is unlikely that a major over mintmark wouldn't be discovered for 107 years, considering the number of people who have avidly collected and examined Lincoln cents for most of that time.

1831 large letters (N1) Matron Head large cent, uncertified, my and seller's grade Extremely Fine: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

I wouldn't be concerned at this point. It can take NGC a week or more to open packages and enter the coins in the submission into its system. Only three business days have passed since USPS delivered your package to the warehouse. I'd wait until at least the end of next week before inquiring about this again.

1914 Barber quarter, PCGS graded MS 64: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

1931-S cents tend to be in much higher grade than 1914-Ds. There were fewer collectors of coins by date and mint in 1914 than in the 1930s. The vast majority of the 1914-D mintage went into circulation and stayed there for many years until many collectors started looking for them, while much of the 1931-S mintage at first stayed in banks due to the Depression and then was hoarded in uncirculated condition by dealers and collectors. It is said that one Maurice Scharlack alone hoarded some 200,000 uncirculated 1931-S cents, over 23% of the original 866,000 mintage! See S. Taylor, The Standard Guide to the Lincoln Cent (3d ed. 1992) at 44-45, 82-83; D. W. Lange, The Complete Guide to Lincoln Cents (2005) at 115-16, 163-64. Most of the mintage of 1931-S cents likely still exist in Extremely Fine to Uncirculated grades, while many of the 1914-Ds were lost in circulation or worn down to low grades and are often impaired. I don't support the hoarding or use in type sets of "key date" coins, which creates an unnatural demand for them with artificially high prices that may be vulnerable to crashes when prices are seen to peak and hoards are dispersed. Even 1914-Ds in uncirculated grades are probably no rarer than many other uncirculated mintmarked cents of the 1911-27 era but sell for very high prices due to the perception of the 1914-D as a "key". You might want to consider a well-struck uncirculated mintmarked 1911-27 cent in brown or red and brown preservation over either a circulated 1914-D or an uncirculated 1931-S for your type set. You may discover that finding one is a challenge.

If the coin is as dull as it appears in the photos, it is unlikely that it will be graded higher than MS 63 and will more likely receive a MS 62 grade. The intensity and attractiveness of luster is a major factor in the "market grading" of coins, and a coin as dull and lifeless as this 1913 Variety 1 appears to be will not earn a "gem" grade. The unattractive spotty toning and the weak strike on the bison's head don't help either. Compare the luster and strike on this 1938-D that NGC graded MS 66. (The scratches are on the holder.)

1939 "Mercury" dime, now NGC graded PF 67:

And I assure you that your 1982-D Lincoln cent is a large date, not a small date and abundantly common in 95% copper composition. See the following comparison of the large and small date versions, courtesy of @EagleRJO:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your coin appears to have been mutilated by being squeezed against another coin and is not a mint error. The date is still clear because, as @Greenstang stated, the raised details and lettering of the other coin exerted more pressure on your coin than did the more recessed areas of its fields. The number of occurrences during the production process that can result in a mint error are limited, while the occurrences that can result in damage that a coin can receive after it leaves the mint are limitless. To learn more about the minting process and mint errors, see the following resources: Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com) 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) For a comprehensive overview of mint errors, see the website error-ref.com.

1937 Roanoke commemorative half dollar, presently uncertified. My approximate grade would be MS 64.

The 1902 is another less common date. This one has fewer bagmarks than usually seen on Morgan dollars but has light, scattered hairlines on Liberty's face, and the luster is somewhat dull. It cost me about $50 in 1992.

The 1891 isn't really scarce but is seen less often as an uncirculated coin than any Philadelphia mint coin dated from 1878-1890. In 1990 this one cost me $37.80.

I recently took a few "better common date" BU (MS 63 or so) Morgan dollars that I bought in the early 1990s out of a safe deposit box. I plan to submit them to NGC under the "Economy" tier for registry set purposes, even though it doesn't make a great deal of sense financially. This one is an 1888-O that I bought in 1990 for all of $25:

No. This is a "ludicrous forgery" that looks nothing like a genuine and extremely rare "1804" novodel silver dollar.

I don't know what you've been reading. 1971 Eisenhower dollars of all mints and versions are extremely common, except for a few die varieties (mostly doubled dies and repunched mint marks) that have nothing to do with the shape of the earth. See (click on) Eisenhower Dollars (1971-1978) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). Three different reverse styles that have differing features of the earth were used on some 1972 (no mint mark) circulation issue Eisenhower dollars, one of which, the "Type 2 reverse" is considered scarce and worth a premium. Below are photos of an original, gem uncirculated 1943 steel cent that PCGS graded MS 66. While it's difficult to appreciate fully the frosty versus shiny difference from the photos, notice the surface texture and crispness of the details of this coin. Additionally, the edge of an original piece is usually dull, as the steel was zinc coated before the planchets (coin blanks) were punched out. I strongly recommend that you obtain a current (2024) or recent edition of the "Redbook" mentioned in the "Resources for New Collectors" topic and read it. It will answer many of your questions that require basic knowledge about U.S. coins and assist you in formulating questions you may still have.

The set contains genuine, very low value coins and was put together for sale by mass marketers as a novelty to people who have little interest in or knowledge of coins. The 1943 steel cent was clearly plated as many were to hide dark gray oxidation of the zinc coating and possibly rust as well. It is only worth a few cents, as is the well-circulated 1945-S "shell case copper" wheat cent. (Original uncirculated 1943 zinc coated steel cents are frosty, not shiny.) The set is more interesting as a World War II themed souvenir than it would be if you were to break it up. The 1971-S Eisenhower dollar was originally sold by the mint for $3 in a soft plastic sheet that was housed in a blue envelope. It is silver clad with an overall 40% silver content currently worth about $7.50. If the coin is still in uncirculated condition (shows no observable wear), it might retail for $10-$15 but otherwise is only worth its silver value. If you want to learn about U.S. coins and how to grade and value them, the print and online resources described in the following topic should get you started:

I've never been keen on so-called "strike rarities" based on single characteristics, whether they be full bell lines, full heads, full bands, or full steps. Coins with these characteristics are not always fully struck in other areas and may not be attractive overall. The blame is really with collectors who refuse to develop their own knowledge, judgment and taste and instead base their purchases on what is written on a grading service tag rather than on their own evaluation of the coin in the holder. They have ceded their own judgment to grading services that use the terminology of the ANA grading standards but do not consistently adhere to them. Shown below is a 1953-S Franklin half dollar graded MS 65 by PCGS. The coin is brilliant and frosty, generally well-struck and attractive, and the bell lines show weakly in some areas but mostly all the way across. A dealer sold it a few years ago for $45. The 1953-S is considered to be the rarest issue with "full bell lines". If the coin were just a bit stronger on the bell lines and had "FBL" on the holder, there are collectors who would pay $25,000 for it! In what world does this make sense?

I agree that based on the photos this Kennedy half dollar exhibits no mint error or die variety. In the future, please post clear, cropped photos of each side of a coin about which you have questions. We can't even tell whether this coin is a 1972 or a 1972-D, which would make it more time consuming to check for known doubled dies or other varieties. If a coin exhibits a significant mint error or die variety, it will generally be apparent to the unaided eye or at low magnification. If you need to use the level of magnification shown in your photos, any anomaly will generally be considered insignificant and not worth a premium to collectors.