• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Rattlers and Fattys....let me see whatcha got?

Started by kryptonitecomics,

49 posts in this topic

kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
Posted

Since my budget is really limited right now I thought I would start picking up some of the older PCGS and NGC slabed common date Morgans. I always liked the NGC No line Fattys becuase of the usually rim toning found on coins housed in those holders and there is just something about the old Rattler holders with upside down and sideways coins that always gets a laugh out of me. Since I purchased these coins off line I can't say that any of them are upgrades since I don't have them all in hand but with these being common dates.....there no value in cracking them out for a possible one point upgrade anyway so I am planning on just enjoying them as they are............

 

SO....... post them if you got em and if you have one of the black NGC holders let me just throw out a YOU SUCK right now!!!!! :censored:

 

Recent pick ups...

 

4eb8_1.JPG

 

 

63c9_12.JPG

 

 

ba57_1.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Like gold if you own one....very first Generation NGC holder were black and are extremely rare to find. The coin in the holder really doesn't matter much....if you had a 1944 Mercury Dime in MS65......in a black holder......well lets just say that I don't think you could buy it for $100 bucks.... (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

That '81-S really looks nice. I don't know if you were around (or lurking) at the time, but a discussion came up where James pointed out how nice the strike was on the '81-S. I agree with him 100%. I believe that was also about the time when he came out of the closet and admitted that he collected Morgans, too.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I didn't see the thread but I do agree the strike and surfaces are typically very nice on the 81-S Morgans and as a matter of fact the nicest non toned Morgan I even owned was an MS66 1881-S if you recall......it was the one I found in that old Photocertified holder graded MS66 and I crossed it into a PCGS holder at the same grade :)

 

Here is a link to an NGC Black Holder on Heritage:

 

NGC First Gen Black Holder

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

Speaking of lawyers, when my siblings filed suit against me as executor of Mom's estate to force the sale of the house, I had to give a deposition at their attorney's office. One of the things he asked about was the ownership of my coin collection. I told him that I started collecting coins in 1957, that no others in my family ever collected coins and it would be a cold day in hell before they ever got their greedy paws on my collection. Coincidentally, my attorney is also the Secretary of the Ft. Myers Coin Club.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

These aren't rattlers, either, but I'm curious to know where they fit in the PCGS timeline. Each of the inserts is actually a slightly different shade of green. Could they have faded?

 

Chris

45501-IMG_1867.JPG.6bd51c2456694f1aaa196feb36a93b22.JPG

45502-IMG_1868.JPG.85012ab51917eafa47982b74c095c7ba.JPG

45503-IMG_1869.JPG.cda638f1aaa1fca695f74cc941e45dd5.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would have to check out that web site that Conder101 created which shows all of the different slab generations to see when PCGS was using those slabs Chris.

 

Regardless that's a nice batch of coins!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
These aren't rattlers, either, but I'm curious to know where they fit in the PCGS timeline. Each of the inserts is actually a slightly different shade of green. Could they have faded?

 

Chris

 

Thanks, Shane! I checked Conder's thread on these slabs:

 

1) The slab for the '83-CC was produced sometime between 1990-1995.

 

2) The slab for the '88 was produced sometime in October or November of 1989.

 

3) The slab for the '98-O was probably produced sometime between 1995-1998 since it has "Copy Protected" on the back, but the "PCGS" font on the front doesn't seem as bold and it looks like it is a little further from the top edge of the insert when compared to the example shown by Conder101.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
That 98 O is a killer coin Chris. (thumbs u

 

Thanks, Irvin! Someday, I might get lucky and find an MS67 (year/mm doesn't matter) for a good price. It would be nice to have an example for each grade of AU through MS. I think I recall seeing a picture of an MS68, but I can't recall any specifics about it. When they get to that level, I usually drool for a few seconds and move on before I get my shirt soaking wet.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
MS67 common dates can still be had pretty cheaply.....but MS68 tend to jump up quite a bit!!! Would be awesome to own one though...... :cloud9:

 

Do you know anyone who has a common date 67 DMPL Battle Creek they would let go (real) cheap? :devil:

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkyMan

SkyMan

Posted
Posted
MS67 common dates can still be had pretty cheaply.....but MS68 tend to jump up quite a bit!!! Would be awesome to own one though...... :cloud9:

 

Do you know anyone who has a common date 67 DMPL Battle Creek they would let go (real) cheap? :devil:

 

Chris

 

There was one MS67* BC coin. IMO not really a 67, and while the color was nice it certainly wasn't as spectacular as some others. The highest graded DMPL was a 65 I believe.

 

IMO, and in most others, the coin, BC2_1216, was the single best BC coin. It is a MS66* and SHOULD be a 67. While it is NOT my coin here's some pictures...

 

1216_66_10063.jpg

1216_N66Star10063A.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keleum

Keleum

Posted
Posted

That's certainly a beautiful coin.

 

I know this question is going to get me in trouble, but alas I'm eager for information.

 

Why/how is this determined not artifically toned, whats the natural process we assume happened to this coin? Is it natural because it took decades to tone this way, because it has depth on the coin.

 

I know there's been a lot of discussion on AT vs. NT, usually centering how far AT something looks. But this is a concrete example of how far NT something can look. (without offending the owner)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkyMan

SkyMan

Posted
Posted
That's certainly a beautiful coin.

 

I know this question is going to get me in trouble, but alas I'm eager for information.

 

Why/how is this determined not artifically toned, whats the natural process we assume happened to this coin? Is it natural because it took decades to tone this way, because it has depth on the coin.

 

I know there's been a lot of discussion on AT vs. NT, usually centering how far AT something looks. But this is a concrete example of how far NT something can look. (without offending the owner)

 

Keleum, go ATS and type Battle Creek into the search engine. You'll find MORE than you ever wanted to know about the whole AT/NT discussion about BC coins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing