• 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.

Proof or business strike?

Started by JIM F.,

21 posts in this topic

RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Nice, average circulation strike coin. (Of course, ALL coins made were really "business strikes" because that was the business of the mint.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldFinger1969

GoldFinger1969

Posted
Posted
No question about it: business strike. Fields are not mirrored, strike is mushy, rims are rounded. There is absolutely nothing about this coin that looks like a proof.

 

Were proof coins of the 1850's noticeably different from regular strikes ?

 

Today and in recent decades, of course you can tell the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
No question about it: business strike. Fields are not mirrored, strike is mushy, rims are rounded. There is absolutely nothing about this coin that looks like a proof.

 

Were proof coins of the 1850's noticeably different from regular strikes ?

 

Today and in recent decades, of course you can tell the difference.

 

Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JIM F.

JIM F.

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JIM F.

JIM F.

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

Thanks. For some reason I had it the other way around. So I learned something today! Are flat rims indicative of Matte Proof Lincolns?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

Thanks. For some reason I had it the other way around. So I learned something today! Are flat rims indicative of Matte Proof Lincolns?

 

 

 

No. They would be likely to be broad and squared off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jpcienkus

jpcienkus

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

I thought the old proofs had "flat" rims and the angle to the edge of the coin was sharp, no beveling.

 

Seems there might be some confussion with wording. So I ask this question to you: What is the correct language when defining the rims of early proof coins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

I thought the old proofs had "flat" rims and the angle to the edge of the coin was sharp, no beveling.

 

Seems there might be some confussion with wording. So I ask this question to you: What is the correct language when defining the rims of early proof coins?

 

My answer would be: Generally speaking, Proof coins (even early ones) tend to have sharper, squared, as opposed to rounded rims, compared to business strikes.

 

It was a good idea of yours to to try to clarify the language! I apologize if my previous post was confusing to anyone. I was looking at the image of the OP's coin at the time and the rims look flat, not sharp or squared off to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jpcienkus

jpcienkus

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

I thought the old proofs had "flat" rims and the angle to the edge of the coin was sharp, no beveling.

 

Seems there might be some confussion with wording. So I ask this question to you: What is the correct language when defining the rims of early proof coins?

 

My answer would be: Generally speaking, Proof coins (even early ones) tend to have sharper, squared, as opposed to rounded rims, compared to business strikes.

 

It was a good idea of yours to to try to clarify the language! I apologize if my previous post was confusing to anyone. I was looking at the image of the OP's coin at the time and the rims look flat, not sharp or squared off to me.

 

Thanks Mark. I use the words "flat" and squared off when trying to define the rims of proof coins and was a little confused. No apologies necessary. It's clear to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

I thought the old proofs had "flat" rims and the angle to the edge of the coin was sharp, no beveling.

 

Seems there might be some confussion with wording. So I ask this question to you: What is the correct language when defining the rims of early proof coins?

 

My answer would be: Generally speaking, Proof coins (even early ones) tend to have sharper, squared, as opposed to rounded rims, compared to business strikes.

 

It was a good idea of yours to to try to clarify the language! I apologize if my previous post was confusing to anyone. I was looking at the image of the OP's coin at the time and the rims look flat, not sharp or squared off to me.

 

Thanks Mark. I use the words "flat" and squared off when trying to define the rims of proof coins and was a little confused. No apologies necessary. It's clear to me.

 

That makes sense - thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I look at the tips of the stars and see some not fully struck. Is that a good diagnostic or were some proofs even from this era that softly struck?

 

A number of a proofs I have seen do not exhibit fully struck stars. But often, their mirror-like surfaces, strike detail amd rims easily distinguish them from business strikes.

 

Below is a link to the auction listing for one of the finer Proof 1855 Large Cents I have seen. I bid on it several years ago when it was offered, but was unsuccessful:

 

1855 Proof Large Cent

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman1794

coinman1794

Posted
Posted
I was 99.9% sure it is business strike. The 0.1% uncertainty was the flat rims.

Thanks for the input. It is residing in an old small ANACS MS-65 BN holder.

 

 

The "flat" rims are indicative of a business strike, not a Proof.

 

Thanks. For some reason I had it the other way around. So I learned something today! Are flat rims indicative of Matte Proof Lincolns?

 

 

 

The characteristics of Proofs are full, squared-off rims, while business strikes are rounded off between the rim and the edge. I think this is what is meant by "flat" in this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing