EagleRJO

On 2/23/2024 at 1:48 PM, Mr.Bill347 said:

This is to complete my Kennedy Half Dollar Set!

Well now you have done it and opened up pandora's box again!  What about all the other varieties needed to "complete" the set.   

There are many collecting styles, often with crossovers.  Simply because you wouldn't be caught dead roll hunting, even though you have stashed rolls of coins, doesn't invalidate that as a coin collecting style that could appeal to someone of any economic standing.  Stiff upper lip old boy. 

It may be some type of glue where an impression was made by a coin or other object considering it's raised outside the impression and some of the lettering in the affected area is still visible.  But I doubt an acetone soak would really do anything from the appearance.

And while the coin is pretty dinged up in general, I don't think there is any need to berate the op or be egotistical over their description or asking about this coin as they just may not have known about the overall condition having become accustomed to the appearance of normal scuffed up pocket change, it is very unusual looking, and this is the Newbie sub-forum.

That and considering "good" is not really a positive term in numismatics or grading, such as the attached quarter graded "Good" (G4) by NGC even though it is obviously not in great shape.  I never liked that term for one of the lowest coin grades.

On 2/22/2024 at 8:10 PM, Henri Charriere said:

... the last time a new  error over 25 years old was found in circulation? 

I don't think it's completely unlikely to imagine that a very old one-off or unique mistake (aka "error") can periodically surface which had been sitting in someone's coin jar or sock drawer all those years and then is passed on, or even floating around in circulation for minor errors which just isn't noticed.

Now expecting that to occur with a repetive variety, like a true doubled die coin, with vast numbers circulating is another story.  Although it does occasionally occur, such as with newly discovered varieties for Morgans as listed on VAM World.

On 2/22/2024 at 7:01 PM, J P M said:

Perhaps he meant to say Silver and instead said Copper.

I think they may have meant copper-nickel (75/25), although that really wouldn't be possible since that hadn't been used since 1942 and then wouldn't be used again until the following year in 1946.

On 2/19/2024 at 6:25 PM, powermad5000 said:

I am of the camp that chopmarked coins are damaged

As do many.  I tend to look at in terms of it was customary and accepted practice for merchants in Asia to check and then mark silver coins, and the US was shipping the vast majority of the Trade Dollars directly to Asia for use in trade where they must have been aware they would be marked.

I think it is interesting how divided collectors are about that, and even the TPG big boys are divided on this with one Details grading chopped coins and the other straight grading them.

On 2/22/2024 at 4:43 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Well, standard alloy "composition," not copper "planchet," per post preceding yours.

Just a little humor.  I am aware of the coin compositions, and there are no period copper coins, only brass or bronze which is a high percent of copper but still not just copper. 

I am not really sure what the op means by a "war nickel on a copper planchet".  So maybe @Emmure can fill us in on what coin or error they are looking for.

On 2/19/2024 at 5:04 PM, DWitt said:

Is this something that I should have graded?

I am just curious as to why you thought this coin might be worth getting graded?

On 2/22/2024 at 5:25 PM, J P M said:

Yes, it is maxed out of height in the stand when shooting a nickel.

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.

On 2/22/2024 at 5:30 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Blast from the Past!

🐓  :  That was a Trade Dollar???

Q.A.:  I know... it's a long story.  

Hmmm, are you cracking up (for the third time?) talking to the Rooster again.   

On 2/22/2024 at 4:28 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Ditto the delamination of the coin's copper mascara on the Reverse

Hmmm, does you're Ole Lady put on plating when you are getting ready to go out for dinner?   

P.S.  From a few hints of where you live it may be both mascara and plating.  

On 2/22/2024 at 1:30 PM, Emmure said:

Was this by chance be the war nickel on a copper planchet I've read about

Sure, that's a war nickel with 56% copper in the Cu-Ag-Mn planchet.

I have an extender for my scope which allows me to get full images of even larger silver dollars.  I'm assuming JPM doesn’t have that if those are scope images.

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

On 2/20/2024 at 2:01 PM, J P M said:

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

The doubled lettering posted and which I was noting, including some of the letters in "America" and "Dollar", are raised which is why I was asking about the op's reference to "incuse md".

On 2/21/2024 at 6:05 PM, NeverEnoughCoins09 said:

way back and current and it is all over the place

Forget older pricing, like that found in NGC Guide Prices, as the 5FS ones just are not realizing that any more.  I always look up recent auction prices on both eBay and GC.

On 2/21/2024 at 5:32 PM, NeverEnoughCoins09 said:

That's not correct. It's with 5FS.

That is the only CoinFacts option for a 5FS coin, as it's not PCGS FS or NGC 6FS.  Around $200 retail seems consistent with recent GC and eBay sales in the range of $110 to $300 for a 1950-D 5C MS67 5FS coin.  I find Collectors Corners prices to be very high retail, and you can ask for the moon so I don't go by asking prices.

Also the 5FS coins used to go for more, so you may be looking at old pricing like that found in NGC Guide Prices.  Figure wholesale at about 75% to 80% retail, if say sold on eBay or consigned to GC or HA.

On 2/20/2024 at 10:50 AM, Mike Meenderink said:

The coin above appears to be DDO north

I think you mean DDR.  I also see some notching, particularly visible at the "M" in "America", and agree it would be worth posting to the CONECA forum.

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

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

I'm not sure what you mean by "incused md [machine doubling]", as doubling would be raised not incuse, unless you mean it's lower or step-like doubling with the coin in-hand.  Look to see if this doubling visible is at the same level at the primary elements, indicative of true hub doubling like that shown in the attached infographic.

On 2/19/2024 at 1:16 PM, Johny6356 said:

... am just checking who might help me to identify this coin and its detail. I researched there 3 types of 5 choin Russ Korean. I am trying to identify which one is it and to know its value.

Greenstang is correct that counterfeits have been around almost as long as coins have been struck, and definitely were around when the originals of that coin were being struck.  Also it could be a more modern copy as valuable coins are targets of counterfeiters.

We have helped as much as possible, and that coin is very likely a counterfeit of a 1902 5 Chon coin.  The other types of 5 Chon coins are shown on Numista at the following link, of which that coin is not even close to being a match and would be for different years.

Numista - 5 Chon Coins

On 2/19/2024 at 1:26 PM, Johny6356 said:

Any clue how to send it to NGK experts so that they can identify it. 

It has been identified as likely being a counterfeit, and you should be able to see that for yourself.  If you don't believe us or your own eyes feel free to submit the coin to NGC (not NGK) for authentication, which would likely cost you around $125 including a membership just to verify what you should be able to see ... https://www.ngccoin.com/submit/how-to-submit/

I see you posted in a duplicate topic with a change in wording ...

Quote

... what version of 5 chon is this coin

This is not any "version" of the 5 Chon coin.  It appears to be an unauthorized copy or counterfeit which has no monetary value.  You should compare the coin in-hand with the legit examples posted if you don't see this.  It's only value would likely just be sentimental since it was your grandmother's, counterfeit or not.

There was a good topic on CCF about this type of coin wrapper damage with a bunch of example pics that match up pretty well ... https://www.coincommunity.com/errors/wrapping-machine-damage.asp

Better focused cropped photos of both sides would be helpful, instead of a single shot of an enlarged scope screen.  But it does look like the coin took a hit which indented and displaced metal like at the rim, "T", and bottom of the "R" which would not be an error.  Also, I can't imagine how something like that could occur during coin production at the mint.

On 2/18/2024 at 3:09 PM, powermad5000 said:

I know you have interest in these chopmarked issues, but I see a destroyed coin

I do collect chop marked Trade dollars, and was initially interested since it was chop marked and straight graded AU50.  I think a few chop marks can add character to some of these, but when I clicked on the image link my eyes bulged out.

I have no idea how PCG$ straight graded this ruined coin, but I guess if you decide to straight grade chop marked coins where do you draw the line and justify that.