1893 Columbian Commem Arrived Today

[shirohniichan]

Shiroh - I'm aware that the Canadian mint sets were intentionally made prooflike, just as the US SMS sets were. Thus, they aren't really business strike, but they aren't really proof. I find them boring - intentionally made PL's don't have the same mystique and appeal for me as the ones I collect. I'm okay with them being called prooflike, because that is technically what they are.

 

I understand what you mean, but I guess if you wanted to get really technical they aren't the same "prooflike" as US coins. The US proof-like is judged by the coins' mirrored surfaces while the Canadian prooflikes are coins manufactured a particular way. So, for example, if some were accidentally struck with older dies according to the mint set coin process and didn't have mirrored fields they'd still be "PL". On the other hand, business strike coins with deep mirrors shouldn't be called PL according to Canadian standards.

 

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I wanted American collectors to know that numismatic nomenclature for Canadian coins can be confusing. I don't want to sound like a Canadian Coin Curmudgeon

 

A: "I can't believe it-- almost every coin in this roll of Canadian dimes is prooflike!"

B: "First of all, they're not 'dimes'. They're 10-cent pieces. Second, if you got them from a roll they aren't prooflikes."

A: "Look at the mirrors! You can read a newspaper from 10 inches in these things!"

B: "It doesn't matter. You can only get a PL designation if the coin was from a prooflike set."

A: "You're crazy. I know what I see, and the dime in your Canadian mint set doesn't look nearly as nice as half of the ones I got from this roll!"

B: "I think I'll go see what's happening on the World Coin Forum."