GBrad

I'll add to this discussion while interjecting my less than spectacular knowledge but I'm doing so for the sake of newcomers learning.  I may be wrong in saying this but unless 99% of any and all Jefferson's (those with the building on the reverse, not the newer Nickels) have a Full Step designation (known as FS) then NO..... I wouldn't even consider submitting it, especially and totally dependent upon a very high grade Nickel.  But then again, there are some key years that demand premiums without the FS designation but they are very far and few between. With all due respect, this is just a starting point in learning about Jefferson values (meaning FS).  There's a whole lot more that go into them other than Full Steps but at least hopefully you may take something away from this. Just MHO.   

I tried my hand at an overlay of this coin but I am not too savvy on this kind of stuff even thought I have a dang MacBook Pro...... this computer is smarter than a 5th grader for sure.  I could significantly lighten the obverse while editing the photo on my computer and I think I see the culprit here but don't take my word for it.  While moving the Obverse picture over the Reverse picture (I did not use any rotation as I believe this quarter does not have any front to back) and came up with the following. It appears it may be a die clash and the extra fin appears to be in the exact location of the small device in the picture below which I circled in black.  I may be way off base but maybe not.  Hope this helps.  

Pretty interesting for sure.  I looked this one up on this link:

https://en.ucoin.net/coin/bahamas-25-cents-1991-2005/?tid=32737

Definitely not an extra fin on this year coin based on the pics from the link.  My first impression was possibly a die clash of sorts.  Not sure without having an overlay.  

4 hours ago, Just Bob said:

In this case, it has to be a Special Mint Set coin, as there were no proofs made in 1965, 66, or 67.

Hello Bob.  Question here on this one if you don't mind sir?  I am familiar with the whole SMS thing for the years you pointed out for LMC's and that there were not any proofs during this time frame.  What are you seeing on the OP's Cent that would make it an SMS? I've read somewhere in the past about the controversy about SMS's vs. business strikes...... when and where I read this I do not remember.  To my eye this cent appears to be a normal business strike (still a decent Red though).  I say this because in my comparisons with SMS Cents, there seems to be an ever so slight bit more of a separation between the rim and the motto on an SMS (if I am seeing this correctly during my comparisons granted I am wearing my readers..., I could be totally wrong in saying this). Just trying to learn as much as I can here on this subject.  Not trying to hi-jack this thread, I just think many of us could learn from you and others' exceptional knowledge on this subject. Thanks!

1 hour ago, Woods020 said:

You don’t do that with US coinage haha. 

You got that right!! We have become spoiled (or at least I know I have) with the ease of the internet and the popular TPG sites and the other well known reference websites.  This stuff is WAY beyond my pay grade but I am loving learning more about these types of coins....... Tremendous job to those on this forum who have devoted their lives to Numismatics, a major Kudos!!!

I agree with Just Bob on the Mint Mark.  It possibly looks like something is there from your pics.  I looked at VV's listings for this year's RPM but I did not see any Mint Marks with the same positioning as your Cent. Unless those are just spectacularly placed die chips....... I'm not sure.  I will wait on the experts to comment.  

It is at the very least a very slightly Misaligned Die or MAD (without seeing the reverse to tell if it is an off-center strike).  Not that it is worth more than face value but it is still a minor strike error and pretty neat and worth throwing in a 2x2 if you'd like.

1 hour ago, Greenstang said:

The value is on the Reverse.

Welcome to the forum.  Greenstang is correct, this is a copper/clad Bicentennial. I love these Quarters and with all due respect I just wanted to politely elaborate a tad bit on Greenstang's quote.  There is a known variety for this date but it is from the Denver Mint, not the Philadelphia Mint.  Yours looks to be a Philly Mint from the pic as I can't make out a D Mint Mark on the obverse.  I believe "The value is on the Reverse" quote was meant in referring to the Doubled Die variety that does exist on the Reverse of the coin for the Denver Minted Bicentennial Quarter. Although your coin isn't a D Mint, it wouldn't matter if it is was due to the condition of the coin.  This Quarter has seen better days for sure and looks to have had a serious case of road rash, parking lot pounding or an acid bath at some point during it's life and is worth only 25 Cents..... Hope this helps.  

Hello NumisMagic and WELCOME to the forum.  Looks like what the other experts here have said, just a corroded post mint damaged coin.  Lots of good info here on this site.  Keep looking!!!

58 minutes ago, Eleonora said:

He saw my excitement and since then instead flowers or rings, he comes with coins.

I love it!  Very good husband!

55 minutes ago, Eleonora said:

My excitement for coins is knew born.

Hello Eleonora and WELCOME to the NGC forum.  Glad to have you and we all hope you learn a tremendous amount from the expert numismatics here on this site.  You have definitely come to the right place to expand your knowledge.  

Thank you all for the replies. I just wasn't sure on this one especially with the reverse in as good of shape as it is (relatively speaking). Case closed. 

Hello to all.  It has been awhile since I posted on the "Newbie" forum but thought this may get more attention than elsewhere.  I sincerely hope all of you have been doing well. I have come a very long way in my learning about numismatics, varieties and errors predominantly due to those helpful members here on the NGC forum that spurned me along the way and gave me a host of information that I truly learned from, THANK YOU!  I have also been diligent in doing my own research and learning from the plethora of information on the web as well (which everyone should do......).  

I came across this one tonight and was a bit perplexed as to what caused this and/or 'how it did not happen at the Mint'.  I thought this may possibly be some type of a LAMINATION defect. I am extremely familiar with PMD and would not have posted this if I thought it was (but then again I have been wrong many a time ).  At first glance I almost threw it aside as an acid wash job until I examined it further.  I have seen my fair share of acid wash jobs, road rash, PMD, etc..... but this one seemed different upon further inspection especially when I looked at the reverse which is pretty much spotless.  It seems to me that an acid job would not leave the devices as prominent as they are. What first caught my attention on the obverse was LIBERTY and how RTY was still perfectly intact and visible albeit lower in the field. The I in IN is plainly visible as well. Then I noticed the neck and back of the coat on Linc was still perfectly visible and defined. Another observation is that the rim is completely intact other than some PMD on the rim adjacent to LIBERTY but it does not appear that a foreign substance has affected the rim at all.  This one has seen a lot of miles no doubt and has some gunk build-up.  I was going to do an acetone wash on it but I wanted to post it 'AS IS' for your opinion first.  Just not sure about this one. Whatever the verdict is I will no doubt learn from it.  As always, thank you all for your input. 

Nope. 3.,,,,,, Is my computer going on the brink or have you posted this same coin three separate times on this forum????

May I politely inject what a true doubled die looks like. I know this is a Linc but doubling is doubling...... Please move forward and learn what a doubled die is. Otherwise, you are just wasting your time chasing a dead end. The responses you have received regarding your coin are from the best of the best. There is no need to continue to try to convince a professional to believe you have something you do not. 

2 hours ago, Tridmn said:

Explain EVERY, AND I MEAN E V E R Y thing that is wrong with the pics I submitted. IN DETAIL

 NOT SOME HALF BUTT THING. SO, LETS GO MR BIG SHOT. 

 

EXPLAIN WHE THERE ARE 2, COUNT THEM 2 "E'S" AND NOT JUST ONE AS YOU SO BLATANTLY SAID THERE WERE NO ERRORS. LETS GO OLD MAN

In case you didn't know, when you type in all Caps, it typically means you are yelling. So....SHOW SOME RESPECT TO THE SEASONED VETERAN MEMBERS ON THIS FORUM!!!!! Just sayin.......

2 hours ago, Tridmn said:

It's not like I have a bionic eye ot something.

 Only the Six Million Dollar Man had one of those........ I loved that show!!!!

53 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Suggestion #1: Put away the USB microscope.

I completely agree with VKurtB. These USB microscopes have their purpose but IMO you are better off using a 10x or 12x GOOD Triplet style loupe, under an LED light source, to see the intricacies associated with true doubling. Light sources can cause havoc on the interpretation of determining a real doubled die vs. worthless doubling which is what you have here. Many of the people on this forum are experts and I suggest you take their comments and advice to heart.  I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination (still learning from my own diligent numismatic research and from learning from the experts here)  but I did point out earlier on this thread that your coin exhibited die deterioration doubling. Have you researched this topic in depth in order to make the determination between the different types of doubling in regards to true doubling vs. mechanical/machine, deteriorated die doubling, strike doubling, etc......?  VKurtB is an expert and knows his $hat. So are the others that have commented.
To all: Have a great night and a Great Memorial Day!!!!  Please remember those who gave their lives for our Country which ultimately has allowed us all to enjoy our freedom and to simply be able to sit here and discuss these topics!!!  God Bless. 

2 hours ago, J P Mashoke said:

Would some of you call this a 1958 high D MM ?

It’s definitely up there. Unless the MM is touching any of the devices there’s not a premium. Hand punched MM. Pretty neat though. I have one just like this I found awhile back. 

Good pics, but......

4 minutes ago, Modwriter said:

I didn't press the subject as to where they send them back to. I'm going to ask next time.

I just casually asked where they send all their coins and my bank friend said "The Federal Reserve".... I've never really looked into this but they obviously send them somewhere that wraps coin rolls a whole lot tighter than that kid down the street that dove into his piggybank, or his dad's collection..., and threw them into brown paper rolls and tucked in the ends.  Edit- Some of my best finds have been from "that kid" who cashed in his (or his dad's) brown bag Linc rolls at the local Stop and Rob for a few Washington greenbacks.....

2 hours ago, Hoghead515 said:

I got a couple rolls that had some washers in them. 

This brings me to a long debated/wondering question of mine.  Over the years I have found dozens, if not hundreds, of flat zinc/galvanized flat washers in bank wrapped Linc rolls.  Not your homemade coin rolls in the brown paper bag type material sold at Wally World, but the real deal rolls straight from the bank.  When I take my useless change back to my bank to run through their coin counting machine (a few of the zinc flat washers have found their way back into my cull pile but I typically keep and use them for home and work projects....) their machine always kicks them out and they "gladly" return them to me.  But I'm like, HEY..... wait a minute.... these were in your wrapped rolls I got from you.  Their answer has always been, "That's impossible....."  So..... how do these zinc flat washers wind up in Linc bank rolls (found more dimes too in Linc rolls than I can remember, but washers..?)  My bank says they send all of their coins back to the Reserve and that's where their rolls come from.  I guess quality control is lacking.

5 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Oxycodone?  Did someone suggest 🤔 oxycodone would be a "better remedy?"  For what?  Oxycodone is the reason why I developed an irresistible impulse to collect Roosters 🐓.  Unless you can resist everything except temptation, I would strongly suggest trying something else -- or suffering my fate which is time-consuming, prohibitively expensive and the only known cure to which is completion of a Set Registry with the finest specimens known to a TPGS, whether available, affordable, or not.

Welcome to Schedule II..........