Is anyone familiar with Prrof-like IHCs? Opinion on this one...

[moovyz]

I got a couple better pics of this coin. It's a 1909 IHC. Obv has a tiny bit of grunge on a feather and, again, between a couple of letters on "States". Obverse details are 65, IMO. The reverse is what gets me about this coin. Strongest strike I have personally seen... easy 66 as far as details. The first 2 pics are with normal lighting. The 3rd and 4th pics, I angled the coin a bit to show it's field surfaces. The obverse pic didn't pick up the light quite right but, as you can see, the reverse fields look proof. Now I'm wondering if perhaps it was a dipped proof. Coin was BB's for "Questionable Color".

 

Opinions please!

[MarkFeld]

Is does not look at all like a Proof to me.

[Tradedollarnut]

I don't think I've ever seen a prooflike IHC.

 

Strongest strike I have personally seen... easy 66 as far as details.

 

 

I've heard statements like this before and don't get it. Full strike is such a small factor in grading that it doesn't make any sense.

 

[kryptonitecomics]

Let me relay a quick story too you about an IHC I bought off Ebay for like $75 bucks....it had great purple toning on the reverse and proof like surfaces so ....I thought it was a proof that was just misattributed. I sent the coin to Ron Sirna and he said it was a Business strike that had been cleaned so.....in my experience.....most of the IHC with PL surfaces are a result of some form of cleaning (thumbs u

 

If Ron reads this e-mail....I still want that IHC back

 

[jesbroken]

What is the material that has filled the bottom of the feathers in? I thought it might just have been glare, but your second photo eliminated that glare. Just curious.

[moovyz]

What is the material that has filled the bottom of the feathers in? I thought it might just have been glare, but your second photo eliminated that glare. Just curious.

 

 

I don't see what you are referring to. Which feathers?

 

 

If you're referring to the gap between all the feathers, the "v" where they seperate from eachother, it's just the curve of the metal. I've compared this to the 64 slab I have and even the feathers are much higher than the 64. It was a very strong strike. The relief is very pronounced.

[moovyz]

I don't think I've ever seen a prooflike IHC.

 

Strongest strike I have personally seen... easy 66 as far as details.

 

 

I've heard statements like this before and don't get it. Full strike is such a small factor in grading that it doesn't make any sense.

 

 

Ok, there are virtually no blemishes of any kind... no bags marks, no rubs on the high points, every line on the sheild is perfect, with no dents or fills. Every leaf in the wreath is fuller, higher and more defined than any other IHC that I have ever seen. I have numerous IHCs, 2 are slabbed, a 63 and a 64, neither comes even remotely close to the strike, as far as perfection of the details.

 

In regards to the fields... proofs are made with highly polished dies and planchets, yes? Well the fields on ALL my other coins have smooth surfaces with minor imperfections, sometimes flow marks. This has FAR smoother surfaces, and I don't just mean that they have been cleaned off. There are no brush marks, so it has not be abrasively cleaned or polished. This reverse looks like it was made from a highly polshed die or planchet. At the very least, it had to have been one of the very first pressed from a new set of dies. The obverse is also better than most IHC I own but not quite as PL as the reverse. The coin may have been dipped at some point. But I have other that have likely been dipped and although dipping removes much of the surface stuff, it does not polish the metal. Telltale signs of previous flaws often remain. I don't know how else to describe it...This coin seems PL in appearance. I have owned a few DMPL Morgans in my time and it is like that. The bust is well defined but more satiny so cleaning doesn't explain it. You couldn't clean (or polish) the fields and not have the same effect on the bust or other details. It is almost a cameo type PL.

 

Anyway, back to your statement of "not getting it"... this coins has all the aspects of a 66 grade, details, strong strike, no marks/hits, color, lustre... I was simply trying to point out that the strike is far better than the 63 or 64 I own, or many of the 65's I've seen.

[Tradedollarnut]

That's kinda cool - perhaps the grading services haven't seen that many PL IHC's either. Mark would be able to answer that better than I.

[kryptonitecomics]

Just for the record....it doesn't haven't to look polished or have hairlines on the surface to be cleaned....the coin I had looked proof with full strike and monster mirrors....and it was still cleaned as evidence by the color being off....I suggest that is what the TPG saw in your coin which is why it bagged. It doesn't mean it's not a nice coin......and the TPGs can't be wrong.....but they look at a lot of coins that are original vs messed with and I think they get it right most of the time.

[MarkFeld]

That's kinda cool - perhaps the grading services haven't seen that many PL IHC's either. Mark would be able to answer that better than I.

I occasionally see a semi-PL or fully PL business strike, but the coin in this thread does not look PL to me and the color looks off/unnatural, as well.

[moovyz]

I grant that the coin was possibly cleaned (dipped, possibly lightly wiped) in years past. It still exhibits luster, but I don't see how cleaning or dipping a coin creates a mirror PL field from a business strike.

 

 

If this were the case, could you take any business stike BU Morgan and make it a DMPL?? My understanding, again perhaps limited, is that those select Morgans that recieved the DMPL finish came from specially polished dies and only on certain years.

 

 

And again, the cheek of the IHC is not mirrored like the field. Whatever would happen to a fields via some sort of cleaning process would also alter the cheek, feathers, etc. Would it not?

 

I'm really not trying to be difficult here. I have just never seen a business strike PL Indian before. I have never seen one advertised for sale. And I have never seen surfaces like this on anything other than a Proof or a Prooflike (Morgans and a few select others). I've never seen ANY cleaned coin that made the field only look like this.

 

Perhaps Mark can help with my primary question... in your time at NGC, did you come across any PL IHC's? If so, what year? Has anyone else had any experience with one, other than something that was altered?

[MikeInFL]

FWIW, I have seen several PL IHCs. They are anything but common, but they do exist.

[TomB]

Jeweler's rouge creates false mirrors on coins and can leave few, if any, telltale scratches on the coin.

[bsshog40]

Well I know this post is a little long, but I found an interesting article concerning IHC's. Hope this helps with some of the questions.

Proof Indian Head Cents represent a presently undervalued set of 19th century coins that can easily be collected with the possibility of completing a set of nice examples. The set consists of the regular issue dates from 1859 through 1909, a total of 52 coins. There are only two varieties - the 1886 type 2 and the ultra-rare 1864-L, and neither of these coins is required to complete the regular issue set. Although most of the dates have relatively small mintages, they are readily available in the market place. If you are a beginning collector, you can start a set with several of the more common dates (1879 - 1886 or 1898 - 1909) in near gem condition (Pr64RB), for under $300 per coin.

 

If you have never collected proof coins there are certain basics that you should become familiar with. First, proof coins are made differently than regular issue mint coins issued for circulation. Each coin was struck on a polished planchet, and generally they were struck at a slower production rate with higher striking force, often with two blows from the press. Thus, the details of the coins are fully present, and the fields are fully mirrored. These coins represent the epitome of the engravers art - they look like what the engraver wanted the coins to look like. All of the details of the Indian Princesses' feathers are present, all of the diamonds in the ribbon are complete, the details on the reverse wreath are there, including the fine details of the acorns and the veins of the leaves. When compared to the average regular issue coins, proof Indian Head Cents are little works of art - they were intended for connoisseur collectors and sold to them by the Philadelphia Mint separate from the regular issue coins. Until the late 20th century, with rare exceptions, virtually all proof coins were struck only by the Philadelphia mint. They could be purchased individually, but they were generally purchased as part of a set of the minor proof coins - 1CN through 5CN pieces.

 

The second notable feature about proof Indian Head Cents is that they tone differently from regular issue cents. There are two separate metal compositions for the Indian Head Cent proofs. From 1859 to 1864, the composition was copper-nickel, (88% CU, 12% NI) which, when untoned, is a silvery white color. Commencing in 1864, the metal was changed to Bronze, a composition of copper, tin and zinc (95% CU, 5% tin & zinc). From the mint these coins were often wrapped in tissue paper to protect them from handling marks and fingerprints - as they were not released into general circulation, this tissue paper caused them to acquire vibrant colors not seen on regular issue coins. On the bronze coins the colors range from mahogany cherry reds, to violets, indigo blues, greens, and even blushes of pink, yellow and gold. Very few of the mintages of Proof Indian Head Cents have survived with their original untoned color intact. Further, the variations of untoned examples, when found, range from a mellow pink copper color, to golden yellows and cherry reds - these are the coins that the grading services label as "red", but often they are not red at all, but variations of the slightly different bronze alloys used by the mint during the 45 year production of the "copper" mintage of these coins. If you have access to the internet, I would suggest that you go to the WWW.INDIANHEADS.ORG web page and look at the wonderful variation of colors that Paul Houck has posted under the "tones" section of that website. Although the images are all mint state coins, you can see the variety of colors that make up the spectrum for Indian Head Cents - many of the examples are "untoned" examples of the various colors of the bronze alloy that were used by the mint during the 45 year period that these coins were produced.

 

The best way to familiarize yourself with the variety of colors of proof Indian Head Cents is to go to a coin show and ask to see any Indian Head proofs in the dealer's case and look at lots of coins before buying anything. As most of these coins are now over 100 years old, you will see coins ranging from a fully toned, dull brown coin to vibrant "reds" that can make your pulse race.

 

There are additional characteristics that you will also need to familiarize yourself with if you are collecting proof Indian Head Cents. Because of the highly mirrored surfaces, proof coins tend to accentuate any handling marks that have gotten onto the coins after they left the mint. Many proofs will exhibit hairlines from being "wiped" to remove dust or fingerprints from the coin. Spots, from flecks of dirt or fine droplets of water can form on the coins, and seriously impair the look (and value) of these coins. These defects are more manifest on proof coins than their regular issue counterparts. Finally, there are certain characteristics that exist only on proofs and not on regular issue coins. Often you will seewhat are known as "lint marks" on proof coins. When proof coins are made, the dies were cleaned before the striking process. A mint is a manufacturing facility - large production presses are utilized in the coinage process - they require grease and oil to function properly - they are dirty places. Sofor the proof production, the dies would be cleaned before the coins were struck - a cotton cloth would be used to wipeany residual dirt, oil or grease from the face of the dies - but small cotton fibers would often adhere to the face of the diesand then, when the first coins were struck after the dies had been wiped, the outline of the cotton fiber would be impressed right into the surface of the coin - a "lint mark". These minuscule cotton fibers would only last for one or two blows, and would disappear from subsequent striking - until the die face was again wiped and then they would again appear on random places on the surface of the struck coin. Lint marks are not generally considered defects on proof coins, but they can affect the grade and value of the coin if they are so obvious or in a location where they affect the"eye appeal" of the coin.

 

A second characteristic that can be seen on early 20th century proof Indian Head Cents is what is known as "die striations" or "die lines". At first glance, some proof Indian Head Cents made between 1903 and 1909 appear to have fine hairlines on either the obverse or reverse of the coin, and sometimes on both sides. Careful examination will reveal that these lines are fine parallel lines on the entire surface of the field and seem to actually run "under" the devices and lettering. In contrast, hairlines that occur after production of the coins are "broken up" by the lettering and devices - that is the hairlines can't usually run right to the very edge of the devices and lettering and then pick up again exactly at the opposite edge because the devices themselves create a "bridge" effect so that the "wipe effect" stops a little in front of the edge and then picks up a little further past the opposite edge as it continues across the coin. Although "die striations" or "die lines" have a similar appearance to hairlines, they should not affect the grade or value of the coin - but because of the similar look, coins with "die striations" or "die lines" are oftentimes mistakenly given a lower grade by the grading services because they are mistaken for hairlines. Two dates that often show these "die striations" or "die lines" are 1905 and 1907. When looking at these dates remember to account for this mint made characteristic. Once you've seen it, and contrasted it with post production hairlines, you will be on your way to acquiring a level of expertise needed to accurately grade proof Indian Head Cents.

[MarkFeld]

I grant that the coin was possibly cleaned (dipped, possibly lightly wiped) in years past. It still exhibits luster, but I don't see how cleaning or dipping a coin creates a mirror PL field from a business strike.

 

 

If this were the case, could you take any business stike BU Morgan and make it a DMPL?? My understanding, again perhaps limited, is that those select Morgans that recieved the DMPL finish came from specially polished dies and only on certain years.

 

 

And again, the cheek of the IHC is not mirrored like the field. Whatever would happen to a fields via some sort of cleaning process would also alter the cheek, feathers, etc. Would it not?

 

I'm really not trying to be difficult here. I have just never seen a business strike PL Indian before. I have never seen one advertised for sale. And I have never seen surfaces like this on anything other than a Proof or a Prooflike (Morgans and a few select others). I've never seen ANY cleaned coin that made the field only look like this.

 

Perhaps Mark can help with my primary question... in your time at NGC, did you come across any PL IHC's? If so, what year? Has anyone else had any experience with one, other than something that was altered?

I wasn't trying to imply that the coin couldn't be PL without having been cleaned. The reverse looks PL or at least semi-PL in the second image and the color in the images leads me to guess that the coin was simply dipped, not cleaned by other, harsher means or polished, etc.

 

I have seen a number of 1859-1864 Copper Nickel Cents that were semi-PL or PL, as well as some examples in the 1870's and 1880's (perhaps later too) that were semi-PL or PL. I don't recall having seen too many in the 1900's, though. For the record, I don't mean that I was around in the 1870's to 1890's, etc, only that the coins were dated such.

[moovyz]

Jeweler's rouge creates false mirrors on coins and can leave few, if any, telltale scratches on the coin.

 

 

One of the items we found recently in my father's storage shed was a pocket watch chain made from (8) 1883 Hawaii Dimes, soldered to the chain on each side with the coins overlapping eachother.

 

The piece was exceptionally worn and had actually survived a fire at one point which left a melted residue on 4 of the 8 coins. After taking it to 2 show and talking to numerous dealers it was decided that we would try to salvage the coins, the best way possible. 4 of the coins were removed from the chains and dipped, resulting in 4 VG-F, semi natural, coins. The other 4 had to be polished to remove, what looked like, melted plastic that had actuall seeped into the first few layers of silver. These eventually ended up polished with jewelrs rouge and offered for sale "as jewelry pieces" on Ebay. For that matter, all 8 were sold on Ebay.

 

Ironically, the 4 polished coins sold for an average of 40% more than the natural.

 

But I do know the difference. There is simply no questions about this IHC, it has NOT been polished in any way. I would bet my life on it. Dipped maybe, polished, not possible.

 

Does anyone know if ANACS still grades "cleaned" coins? I remember years ago, they would assign a number but identify a coin **Cleaned**. If so, I may send this one to them.

 

Thanks for all the help guys.

 

 

[bsshog40]

ANACS still grades cleaned coins.