Should this qualify as a "full head"?

[James_OldeTowne]

Thanks for the expert opinions. I'm still coming up to speed on this series.

 

LINK

 

James

[jom]

No but it's a pretty coin...

 

jom

[gmarguli]

I believe they require an ear hole to call a coin FH.

[truthteller]

Not a full head.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRUTH

[jom]

I believe they require an ear hole to call a coin FH.

 

True! I've got a hole in my head and everyone knows I'm full (of it).

 

jom

[XpipedreamR]

No but it's a pretty coin...

 

jom

 

 

Ditto.

 

 

Is it graded as FH?

[TomB]

Doesn't look FH to me, however, please keep in mind that to most in this market it matters little what I think and matters tremendously what the holder says.

[Elcontador]

Not even close. You can see the three leaves, but you need to see the line showing Miss Liberty's hair going down the side of her face and a clearly defined ear hole.

 

Coins like this that are mistakenly slabbed as FH are only sold at a deep discount or sold to people who like buying expensive plastic.

[BillJones]

It's not a full head and it's not Unc. either. It's got a rub right down the knee and shin. As a matter of the rub might have taken off some of head details. The coin is only worth MS-60 money at best.

[Newmismatist]

Not a chance. Too flat in the central part of the head . It's not even a well struck coin - missing rivits on the shield and no toes on her foot (at least from the scan) - 1930's come much more fully struck than this - If it's in a FH holder, I'd pass.

[jtryka]

It's an interesting coin, and I don't think it's a full head either. Full face maybe, but not a full head. For reference, here is a pic of my 1930 which is designated FH, but still has a weak strike as seen in the rivets most of all. The photo is not great, but it does illustrate the difference.

 

[BillJones]

Yep! The photo shows the rub right down the leg.

 

As for toes and rivets, you guys are too tough. If you expect that AND a full head, you can pack it in. There are almost no SLQs that will please you. And the ones that will please will cost more than you would every believe.

[CarlWohlforth]

I returned a high priced FH SLQ once because of a rub on the leg. Outside of the rub it was a super coin with ear hole and everything. I guess the grading service granted a little leeway on it. I bought a NO Full Head coin because it had excellent rivets, fully defined shield and other aspects of an excellent strike, but no ear hole. Also it was toned too darkly for many. It was a real bargain in my opinion.

[jom]

I'd say Jeff's coin would grade FH.

 

As to wanting it "all" in a SLQ. It depends. If the coin is priced at FH then it damn well better be full strike. If it isn't I'll pass unless it's got some real stand out toning. This is pretty much the reason I don't collect coins with the FH. The full head just doesn't offer enough "eye appeal" to me to make it worth the premium.

 

jom

[BillJones]

Most "full head" SLQs are not full stirkes. They are full heads.

 

Years ago I had potential customer who wanted SLQ that had full heads, full rivets, full toes, full gown lines, full everything. I asked the leading SLQ dealer in the country about this. His answer was, "You don't have a customer."

 

After I looked at a lot more coins, I decided he was right. If you think that you can only collect full strike SLQs, you have never collected this series beyond the 1917 Philadelphia type I SLQ.

 

They don't come like that guys!

[Newmismatist]

Most "full head" SLQs are not full stirkes. They are full heads.

 

Years ago I had potential customer who wanted SLQ that had full heads, full rivets, full toes, full gown lines, full everything. I asked the leading SLQ dealer in the country about this. His answer was, "You don't have a customer."

 

After I looked at a lot more coins, I decided he was right. If you think that you can only collect full strike SLQs, you have never collected this series beyond the 1917 Philadelphia type I SLQ.

 

They don't come like that guys!

 

Bill, I would agree that many slabbed FHs are not full strikes, BUT, to pay the sometimes stupid premiums for the strike on about 2% of the coin, I would think that the grading services would require a fully struck coin. Unfortunately they don't.

 

The link to the image that James-Early US posted is now gone, but as I remember the coin was over-all a mushy strike or maybe a LDS, Te coin in the image posted by jtryka is a much better strike and although the rivits are not all there, at least you can see where they're supoosed to be as opposed to the missing rivits in the other coin. With regard to the toes, can't really tell if they're "all" there, but they appear to be still on her foot as opposed to the toeless variety that I saw on the link. My point is not that there must be 5 toes & every rivit, but that the coin should be a well struck coin if not fully struck. I mentioned the toes and the rivits, because they were so obviously NOT there.

 

I would agree that after 1917, there are probably few SLQs that have every rivit, every toe and every detail on the head, including the detail in the 3 sprigs and the ear hole. The reason is quite simple: Those portions of the coin are the most recessed parts of the die and hence are the 1st to fill with metal and minute particles of dirt & oil. The mint is after all a machine shop and the environment is not kept clean with 2 micron air filters. In addition, the rivits may be opposite the most recessed portions of the reverse eagle and unless very high striking pressures are used, the metal cannot successfully fill both sides of the coin. That coincidently is part of the problem with the FE cents - parts that are often weakly struck (Obverse tail feathers) are opposite high relief postions of the other side (the reverse wreath which in 1857 was fairly high relief - this was changed on the 1858 SL FE cents ). The mint has trouble fully striking coins with that type of configuration because if they crank up the striking pressure, they prematurely wear out the dies.

 

My earlier point was if you're gonna buy what is probably one of the most common Type 2 FH SLQs (1930) buy a nice one, not a mushy half strike one. My point was not that that you have to buy one that is 100% fully struck on every aspect of the coin. If that's your criteria you won't buy any coins struck for circulation, because virtually none will meet the 100% FS criteria.

 

BTW, Bill - Thanks for the very nice Kentucky token that I bought from you at FUN - a very nice coin , (even if only 98% fully struck )

[BillJones]

Bill, I would agree that many slabbed FHs are not full strikes, BUT, to pay the sometimes stupid premiums for the strike on about 2% of the coin, I would think that the grading services would reguire a fully struck coin. Unfortunately they don't.

 

Newmismatist, if you are a new collector, you are not getting my point or perhaps you don't want to get my point. Standing Liberty Quarters that are sturck up TOTALLY are RARE, execept for the 1917 type I Phildelphia issue. If for the dates that tend to come well struck, they won't show every spec of the detail.

 

Some dates hardly exist at all with a full head let alone the other details. For example I've never seen a 1916 with full head, not even the MS-66 coins that I seen that were labeled as such. I think that 1926-D has similar problems.

 

If "full head" had to mean "full strike" for some dates the population would be ZERO.

[Newmismatist]

Standing Liberty Quarters that are sturck up TOTALLY are RARE, execept for the 1917 type I Phildelphia issue. If for the dates that tend to come well struck, they won't show every spec of the detail.

 

Some dates hardly exist at all with a full head let alone the other details. For example I've never seen a 1916 with full head, not even the MS-66 coins that I seen that were labeled as such. I think that 1926-D has similar problems.

 

If "full head" had to mean "full strike" for some dates the population would be ZERO.

 

Bill, please re-read my post above as I think you have totally misconstrued what I said, and if I wasn't very clear, what I meant.

 

First of all, very few, if any coins struck for circulation are "fully struck" in the literal sense. They are production strikes, not every detail is present and if you don't believe that, compare any coin made by the mint for circulation with its proof counter-part. To me, the common usage of the term "fully struck" for circulation coins means an unusually nice strike that shows the detail of the coin as the die cutter intended, but I don't use that term to mean a coin struck with 100% perfect detail, as I don't believe such coins exist in production struck coins, perhaps with the exception of the St. Gaudens high reliefs which in fact were struck multiple times to bring out the full beauty AND detail of the coins.

 

My simple point is this: If you're going to buy and pay the premium for a FH SLQ (which may be substantial) buy a nice one with at least a good, (but better if an exceptional) strike. The way to tell a good to exceptional strike is to look at the other areas on the coin - rivits on the shield, toes, date, etc. If it's a crappy strike, but with a FH designation, you might want to look for a better coin, especially if it's the most commonly available FH coin for the type 2 SLQs.

 

On the other hand, if a collector is willing to pay premium money for non-PQ coins, rely on the information written on the paper insert and buy what the paper says and does't bother to trouble himself with what the coin looks like, that's certainly his perogative as a buyer, but I would not recommend that as a method of putting together a nice set of SLQs or any other coins for that matter.

 

Newmismatist, if you are a new collector, you are not getting my point or perhaps you don't want to get my point.

 

Well, I suppose that I'm new in the sense that I am always willing to learn about coins, but I do remember putting together a set of SLQs BEFORE J. Cline thought to promote "Full HEAD" SLQs as a marketing method to justify charging large premiums for coins, some of which didn't really look all that nice, but did have a FH (or at least what was called a FH) regardless of whether they had nice luster, or whether the rest of the coin had a decent strike. Unfortunately, the grading services have continued this practice of zeroing in on a very small portion of the coin to signify a premium valued coin. If I am going to pay a premium for a SLQ, I prefer to have it "fully" struck ( ie well struck) and in addition with nice luster and good eye-appeal. When I was activley collecting SLQs, both pre-slab and post slab, I tried to buy a whole coin, not just the head, which as near as I can figure is about 2% of the coins surface.

 

I understand your point which is that if you want 100% fully struck SLQs you'll never get any, and I concur and would submit that the same is true with most coin series: none of them are 100% fully struck up in every aspect, particularly coins that are pre-1965. I certainly agree that some series are struck better than others, possible because of the die characteristics, but unless you limit yourself to proofs, you'll have few "100% fully struck" coins, as those are rare in every series.

 

Maybe there's 1 or 2 points we agree upon, but being "new" at this, I'll defer to your greater experience as a dealer.

 

 

[BillJones]

Good. We agree. The point I was trying to make was there are virtually no 100% fully struck Standing Liberty quarters, and if you say that you won't buy anything but perfectly struck coins, you will most likely buy none at all.

 

I also agree with you point that too much emphasis is placed on the head. Still marketing being what it is, you have to keep the concept simple. Therefore, full head, full bell lines, split bans etc.

[jom]

I also agree with you point that too much emphasis is placed on the head. Still marketing being what it is, you have to keep the concept simple. Therefore, full head, full bell lines, split bans etc.

 

That was my point in that thread about the FBL Franklins. To me it is worth the search to find an "almost" Full Whatever coin that is full everywhere else and get it for 10 times less money. That, to me, is getting a great deal on a coin regarless of which series we are talking about. It's a fun thing to do also....

 

jom

[James_OldeTowne]

I appreciate the discussion - which led me to definitely skip this one.

 

Here is A LINK to the eBay auction for this coin. Obviously, we would all agree that $449 is too much then.

 

Followup question:

 

I know that the 1930-P is easy to find with well-struck detail. How about the "S"? Is it quite a bit tougher!

 

Thanks for any guidance!

 

James

[jtryka]

$449 is probably not that out of line if you are buying the holder and not the coin itself. I like my coin much better and paid significantly less for it.

[jtryka]

Oh, and you probably already know this, but I bet if you bought it and sent it in for a review by that grading company, they would probably just return it to you in a nice new holder with that FH typo corrected.

[Elcontador]

This is a good discussion. Agree with Bill Jones & Numismatist re the 17P Type I; no other coin in the series is struck as well. Re Type IIs, the 30P IMO is probably the best struck.

 

James, the 1930S coins I have seen are not as well struck as the 30Ps; even super-grade coins. I've seen several 30S coins in 7 which lacked a rivet or two.

 

Missing rivets on high end coins are typically the 1 or 2 just below the sash.

 

I have seen five 19Ps that were fully struck and 3 20Ps that also were fully struck.

 

I have a 28S which has ALL details, excepting the rivet below the sash (including complete detail on the inner shield). I have a 29P which has all rivets (though the one below the shield is a bit softly struck).

 

I have yet to see a fully struck coin from the Denver mint, and my 28S is about the best I've seen from San Francisco; Philadelphia seems to have struck the best coins in this series.

 

 

[Newmismatist]

I appreciate the discussion - which led me to definitely skip this one.

 

Followup question:

 

I know that the 1930-P is easy to find with well-struck detail. How about the "S"? Is it quite a bit tougher!

 

Yes!

 

As a follow-up with regard to the issue of Fully Struck SLQs - there are no regular issue proofs, - I think there's a SLQ pattern & I think someone may have slabbed a "Speciman" - so we really don't have any proofs available to put next to a sharply struck regualr issue SLQ. But my experience with other series where there are both proofs and regular issues, (pre-65 coinage) is that almost always, the proof is better struck and shows considerable more detail than any regular issue. THere are some exceptions: in the 1890's some of the proof Morgan dollars are not fully struck up, but then the regular issues for those years aren't well struck either. But you might be able to find an 80-S that looked like a better strike than say an 1893 proof, particularly if you examine the hair curl & the breast feathers, but the general rule is that proofs have better detail than the regular issues struck for circulation.

 

Unfortunately with no proof coinage, we have to find those few availalbe elusive 1st strike SLQs that were the first off of the new dies to see what the die cutter intended the coins to look like in the best possible condition. As there are so few available, we generally get to see only the average struck coins, which, as has been discussed, lack the full detail that was intended to be present on these coins.

 

[BillJones]

To cut to the chase - The Standing Liberty quarters were the worst struck coin series of the 20th century. Honorable mentions (dishonorable mentions?) go to the Peace dollar (both high relief '21 and the some of the later issues, esp. 1923) and a number of the Walking Liberty half dollars, especially the S-mints from the early '40s.

 

For grand prize, the worst struck series among all regular U.S. coins were the Draped Bust, Large Eagle half dimes of 1800 to 1805. The Draped Bust, Small Eagle half dimes of 1796-7 were a close second, and some would argue that they were the worst.

 

(Dis)Honor mentions for the 19th century were the Shield Nickels, especially the 1866; and many of those coins came on poor planchets to boot. A great many business strike Nickel Three Cent Pieces were pretty bad too.

 

In isolated cases a couple of the Dahlonega mint $5 gold coins had the worst reverses that I have EVER seen on a U.S. coin, especially a gold coin. The Mint usually made an effort to make gold coins attractive.

[Newmismatist]

To cut to the chase - The Standing Liberty quarters were the worst struck coin series of the 20th century. Honorable mentions (dishonorable mentions?) go to the Peace dollar (both high relief '21 and the some of the later issues, esp. 1923) and a number of the Walking Liberty half dollars, especially the S-mints from the early '40s.

 

Bill you forgot one of my favorites - Buffalo Nickels, I've owned blasty lusterous Uncs that looked VF/XF because the strike was so bad - If it wasn't for the killer luster, you'd swear they were "used" - the mint also had a serious problem w/the 1856-58LL FE cents, but that was because of the die chacteristics - the high relief wreath prevented the eagles tail feathers from being fully struck up as well as the eagles head, (& the same was true re the wreath) - the striking pressure was simply not high enough to force the metal to flow into the deepest recesses of the die - so finding one fully struck on both sides is a real treat.

 

Nickel being the hardest of the metal used to strike US coins was always a problem for the mint when it came to producing fully struck coins.

[jom]

Agree about the Buffalo's being the worst struck. But I can tell you without a doubt the WORST made coin (overall) was the $5 Indian. There is NO "hard metal" excuse here. iIt was probably the overall design that caused the problem. A large percentage of these coins are just flat out crappola.

[jtryka]

without a doubt the WORST

coin (overall) was the $5 Indian.

these coins are just flat out crappola.

 

For once I agree with you jom!

[jom]

For once I agree with you jom!

 

 

 

 

jom