1945 "No AW" Walking Liberty question from another board

[RWB]

Board poster Apollo14 (ATS) raised an interesting question:

 

This is a question for anyone who could provide an expert answer to the following ...

 

I just obtained a 1945 "No AW" FS-901 Walking Liberty Half Dollar in what I believe will grade MS-64 and possibly MS-65.

 

The coin is blast white and, when I view the reverse straight on, I cannot see the designer's initials. However, if I tilt the coin at certain angles I can just barely make out what might be a shadow of part of the initials.

 

Can any experts here explain exactly what is needed in terms of what can (or cannot) be visible with this exact die variety for PCGS to accept the coin as a "FS-901 No AW"? For example, I thought I read somewhere that only part of the initials were polished off, which may or may not be correct.

 

Thank you!

 

David

 

Not sure about the “expert” part, but this might help. During use the reverse dies were often lightly abraded (“polished”) to remove surface imperfections and minor defects. If this was done too often, or too aggressively, the monogram “AAW” near the reverse rim could be partially or completely removed. (The monogram was raised on the die.) This variety is known for all proof years 1936-1942 and also for most production years after 1933.

 

In my book on 1936-42 proofs, I express the opinion that to be a “No AAW” coin, there must be no trace of the letters visible regardless of tilting at 10x magnification. (I use the analogy of 1922-D No D cents as guidance.) I do not know what criteria the major authentication companies use.

 

Other thoughts?

 

[numisport]

I've assumed that many if not most 1941 proof Walkers are of the 'no AW' variety. These are certainly not scarce varieties for '41s but what about the other proof years. How many reverse dies were used in those years ? Where is that book Roger ?

[RWB]

I'm still holding the book - trying to get a better printing price. (Automation was supposed to lower color printing costs, but all I've seen are stiff increases.)

[CaptHenway]

Sounds like a coin I would have called "No Designer's Initials" back when I was at ANACS, but I have no idea what the TPG's do now.

[RWB]

Could someone let "Apollo14" ATS know he has a response on NGC's board?

[PocketArt]

Interesting thread, and curious to know what the parameters are for the "no AAW" varieties. RWB, I would guess your comparison with the 1922-D would be correct; however, the "AAW" is recessed into the planchet whereas the 1922 "D" mint mark is raised so that would be where my suspicion on grading determination would lie.

 

I did an inspection of my 1945 Walking Liberty Halves and I found an example that has a very, very faint AAW. If you'd like to see the coin I'll post it.

 

Rich

[WoodenJefferson]

An 'expert' would be the grader sitting in a cubicle determining the if it is indeed missing the initials. There are some who would pawn this coin off as a 'weak' missing designers initials, but that in reality, that does not exists...the initials must be missing.

[DWLange]

NGC will not attribute missing AW and missing FG die states if there is even a trace of the letters remaining; they have to be lacking completely. For most issues, these die states are common and carry very little premium, but our customers seem to like them, based on the number of submissions.

[coinman1794]

Board poster Apollo14 (ATS) raised an interesting question:

 

This is a question for anyone who could provide an expert answer to the following ...

 

I just obtained a 1945 "No AW" FS-901 Walking Liberty Half Dollar in what I believe will grade MS-64 and possibly MS-65.

 

The coin is blast white and, when I view the reverse straight on, I cannot see the designer's initials. However, if I tilt the coin at certain angles I can just barely make out what might be a shadow of part of the initials.

 

Can any experts here explain exactly what is needed in terms of what can (or cannot) be visible with this exact die variety for PCGS to accept the coin as a "FS-901 No AW"? For example, I thought I read somewhere that only part of the initials were polished off, which may or may not be correct.

 

Thank you!

 

David

 

Not sure about the “expert” part, but this might help. During use the reverse dies were often lightly abraded (“polished”) to remove surface imperfections and minor defects. If this was done too often, or too aggressively, the monogram “AAW” near the reverse rim could be partially or completely removed. (The monogram was raised on the die.) This variety is known for all proof years 1936-1942 and also for most production years after 1933.

 

In my book on 1936-42 proofs, I express the opinion that to be a “No AAW” coin, there must be no trace of the letters visible regardless of tilting at 10x magnification. (I use the analogy of 1922-D No D cents as guidance.) I do not know what criteria the major authentication companies use.

 

Other thoughts?

 

These die state varieties are very popular, but very few of the No AAW coins actual show "no AAW." PCGS only requires that most of the initial to be gone. When I get them in stock, I refer to them as Weak AAW. The weakness is due in part to polishing, which laps the left part of the monogram; but more so to the late die state, where starburst striations have distorted the surface enough to erase the rest of the monogram. There is almost always at least a shadow of the W present, and those that do not show it might actually be scarce.

 

1946

 

[RWB]

Nice photo of a partial AAW -- it's nearly lost in the die stress.

[PocketArt]

Here is my 1945 weak "AAW." You can see a bit more of the designers initials than on coinman1794's example. Polishing lines evident on this piece.

 

Thanks,

 

Rich

 

 

 

 

 

 

[coinman1794]

Nice photo of a partial AAW -- it's nearly lost in the die stress.

 

Thanks, RWB; that is one of our close-up photos from our coin photography.

[coinman1794]

Here is my 1945 weak "AAW." You can see a bit more of the designers initials than on coinman1794's example. Polishing lines evident on this piece.

 

Thanks,

 

Rich

 

 

 

 

 

The short parallel scratches are actually die stress and starburst striations.

[PocketArt]

Thanks coinman1794; stand corrected and am still learning. Truly appreciate the mentioned differences.

 

Rich

[coinman1794]

Your welcome, Rich. Here is a better example to illustrate the erasing effects of starbursting. Both of these reverses were struck from the same die. The first is Prooflike and the last is die erosion frosted. Not only are the numerous polishing lines gone, but lettering and wing outlines is vanishing, too.

 

 

[johnny9434]

one learns something every day here ( nice pics as well )

[PocketArt]

Terrific examples and great photos! Okay, now I'm curious as to what year your two specimens of the Washington Quarter were minted. Are they SMS examples, probably 1965? My reasoning would be prooflike's are found in special mint sets, and '65 had the highest mintage of sets; perhaps increasing the chance of die erosion occurring?

 

Questions on Walker examples and your Washington Quarters:

 

What causes this die erosion? Is it simply just wear on the die, or, not enough pressure exerted on the planchet during minting process? The production rate exceeding acceptable limits of the machinery and producing weaker strikes?

 

Thanks,

 

Rich

[messydesk]

When I was looking for a 1941 proof half, I specifically did not want one with missing initials, since these coins were missing a lot of other detail as well, including the flag on the obverse. It seemed like the missing initials coins were much more common than coins struck from fully detailed dies.

 

[numisport]

Not only is your example more scarce, mine although missing the 'AW' is a later die state and missing some other detail. My Pf 67 coin is a candidate for trade or upgrade to one that has designer initials.

[WoodenJefferson]

Miss Liberty seems to be floating messydesk.

[coinman1794]

Terrific examples and great photos! Okay, now I'm curious as to what year your two specimens of the Washington Quarter were minted. Are they SMS examples, probably 1965? My reasoning would be prooflike's are found in special mint sets, and '65 had the highest mintage of sets; perhaps increasing the chance of die erosion occurring?

 

Questions on Walker examples and your Washington Quarters:

 

What causes this die erosion? Is it simply just wear on the die, or, not enough pressure exerted on the planchet during minting process? The production rate exceeding acceptable limits of the machinery and producing weaker strikes?

 

Thanks,

 

Rich

 

Rich,

 

The two quarters I posted are examples of 1947-S/S RPM FS-501. I conducted a die state analysis of it to trace the origins of the polished Prooflike stages, and recently posted an article demonstrating the progression.

 

A Rough Reflection: Die State Analysis of 1947-S/S RPM FS-501 Washington Quarter

 

The Polished Prooflike silver coins only exist from 1934-1954.

[PocketArt]

Wow! Great articles and interesting read! Very compelling argument in regards to the progression of this particular specimen through the various stages of the minting process. I also read your sister article; "Jekyll & Hyde," that gives credence to the used die transfer theory.

 

Is it possible that there may be a few surviving San Francisco mint employees form 50' - 54' who may be tracked down to interview? Any that worked for the Denver mint that could be traced?

 

Interesting that this phenomenon occurred from '34-'54; over a 20 year period. I was never aware of prooflike Washington Quarters from this period, and it's one of my favorite series! As mentioned before; still learning more and more each day.

 

Thanks for your efforts,

 

Rich

 

 

[RWB]

[in checking surviving employees at the Denver Mint from 1965 for research on the 1964-D Peace dollar, we found only a few still alive and even less who could remember anything. The odds of finding a living, coherent SF employee from the 1950s is very remote.]

[coinman1794]

[in checking surviving employees at the Denver Mint from 1965 for research on the 1964-D Peace dollar, we found only a few still alive and even less who could remember anything. The odds of finding a living, coherent SF employee from the 1950s is very remote.]

 

So much has been lost to history. Too bad the History Channel wasn't around to do a "reality" series at the Mint.

[coinman1794]

Wow! Great articles and interesting read! Very compelling argument in regards to the progression of this particular specimen through the various stages of the minting process. I also read your sister article; "Jekyll & Hyde," that gives credence to the used die transfer theory.

 

Is it possible that there may be a few surviving San Francisco mint employees form 50' - 54' who may be tracked down to interview? Any that worked for the Denver mint that could be traced?

 

Interesting that this phenomenon occurred from '34-'54; over a 20 year period. I was never aware of prooflike Washington Quarters from this period, and it's one of my favorite series! As mentioned before; still learning more and more each day.

 

Thanks for your efforts,

 

Rich

 

 

Thanks, Rich!

 

Yes, there are some PL silver quarters out there, and from various dates other than this one 1947-S die marriage.

[RWB]

coinman1794 is on the nose! (Or is that "Knows?")