J P M

I thought for sure the toning was going to push this one high. Ya never know, 

On 2/25/2024 at 11:16 PM, Halbrook Family said:

On page 362 of 2018 Red Book it says " early 1965 special mint sets are semi brilliant or satiny (distinctive but not equal in quality to proofs) the coins in later 1965 sets feature very brilliant fields (but again not reaching proof brilliance). 

 I wonder what the difference is. On my nickel set I had to have both sets of the 2005 - 2010 ones. 

What that is saying is the mint messed up but would never admit that. To many people were not satisfied with SMS coins looking no different than your regular strike coins. The later 65 coins made in 66 looked a little better. 

On 2/25/2024 at 2:11 PM, VKurtB said:

My rolls are all solid date BU rolls. It’s fundamentally different. I cannot see ANY point in searching circulated rolls. It wastes EVERYBODY’s time; perhaps least of all the hunter’s.

LoL... Kurts rolls are all new coins throughout many years of collecting. He probably has error coins that no one will ever know exist.  

I would say it should be at least a 66 maybe a 66+ I think the ding would keep it from being more.

On 2/24/2024 at 11:00 AM, EagleRJO said:

Hope you are doing better.

Yea, a few hundred for lower uncirculated grades so of course the YT hacks are hawking this one too in their simple to get rich quick from pocket change .

Probably included in Lincoln cent roll hunting sorting mats if you use those.  I use mats for other coins like quarters I roll hunt as a quick reminder of coins to keep an eye out for before going through rolls.

Ya this is not a coin that was ever on the radar for me. 

Yes I have seen these and thought about getting one if the price is right.

 Great. now there is another one to keep an eye out for. I am sure it is worth a bunch of bananas. Maybe on YouTube.

This is what the original SMS coin sets looked like 65,66 and 67. No other proofs or mint sets were made those years. 

On 2/22/2024 at 7:48 PM, powermad5000 said:

It is a shame on the 2009.

Ya I thought about keeping it but I have enough junk coins.

On 2/22/2024 at 5:54 PM, EagleRJO said:

I was able to get a 5-inch "extension tube" for my scope stand which might be worth looking into if they even make that for your scope as I like the images that the scope can capture.

I could make something like that out of a 1/2 in nipple, I guess.

Perhaps he meant to say Silver and instead said Copper.

If I need a really nice shot, I use my phone, but I have to e mail it then upload it and save it to a file. That can take a bit of time. 

On 2/22/2024 at 4:44 PM, Sandon said:

    My digital microscope can't take a full image of a coin larger than a nickel on its stand, so I place it on a stack of books of necessary height to capture larger coins.  The scope has a broad range of focus and was marketed as being able to photograph coins, so I don't know why it was equipped with such a short stand.

On 2/22/2024 at 11:16 AM, EagleRJO said:

Just curious, can you not get full coin pics with the scope you use?  If so, do they make a height extension?

Yes, it is maxed out of height in the stand when shooting a nickel. When I am just doing quick shots, it is just easier to click and post. I can focus and hold it by hand if need be or as Sandon said put it up on something. I think it is made this way to fit in the travel case. I take it with me when I am on the road. It takes nice shots with a very true to life color.  

That is the last of the nickels. Nothing to write home about here. Too bad the 2009 D was damaged by a roll wrapper machine. On to the cents

I got another batch to look at. I will post any sweet ones if I find any.  

Very nice coin. MS67 can be the high ball in nickels most of the time they are a bit too high for my pocket but as the others have said, It depends on the buyer. 

On 2/21/2024 at 11:04 AM, Cams said:

It's incase but is raised around the outside. The lighting isn't good on my pics and I'm trying to figure out how to get the pics off my microscope on to my phone to show it better- but I understand it's just damage- just didn't understand why the letters were still intact- wouldn't they be very flattened?

Is it some kind of glue or epoxy on the surface of the coin? It looks like an old picture. 3/02/2021 

On 2/21/2024 at 10:10 AM, Mr.Bill347 said:

😆 not really but one MS65 is worth $30

How much is it at NGC to grade a coin now?

On 2/21/2024 at 7:48 AM, Cams said:

Yeah- they do sound harsh to me! I get that y'all know WAY more than me, but I am trying to learn as much as I can. I did look at the links you provided in one of  my previous post- so thank you, they are helpful! But "no known universe " and  "Revise your idea of good condition "  are just demeaning comments that aren't necessary! Like I said, im new to this- which is why I posted it in the Newbie  chat, hoping for " no, that's just damage"  because that would've been sufficient! 

Hi Cam , It looks like someone tried to make it look like an error. Not imposable but, it would be hard for a coin to get turned on edge in the coin press. Is the impression raised or incuse? 

 Bill. do you need them? at $1.27 each?

On 2/20/2024 at 12:56 PM, EagleRJO said:

I'm not sure what you mean by "incused md [machine doubling]"

Most of the devices on the new quarters would be incuse. 

On 2/20/2024 at 9:52 AM, Kerrykz said:

I've heard notched dbling and I've also heard incused md

Have you also turned the coin and looked at it on a angle. if you are using a scope with multiple led lights, it will cast shadows of doubles.