1952 & 1953 Superbird Quaters 0

[FrederickMorris]

I have read several places that the 1952 and 1953 Superbird quarters that I have always called "superman" quarters" were only found in proof sets. I don't believe that to be the case at all. I have at least 2 1952 superbird coins not from a proof set and 1 1953, I have had them for years, believe we bought them at an auction. I will have to pull them out and get pictures but they are not proof and are not from a set. Has anyone else found the "S" bird on a quarter that wasn't a proof. THank you in advance.

Morris

 

[Hoghead515]

I think the only one they reconize is the 1952 proof quarter. Thats just off the top of my head from what research Ive done. There may be one listed I dont know about. Im pretty sure thats the only one reconized by the TPGs.  I could very well be wrong. 

[VKurtB]

So you think you have non-proof Superbirds from 1952 and even from 1953? I realize what you do for a living, but these just don’t just manifest out of thin air. They would not be recognized by NGC. 

[Sandon]

   We will await your photos of the purported 1952 and 1953 circulation strike examples.  As stated, the only published listing of this variety is for proof 1952 Washington quarters.

   There are two variants listed in Fivaz and Stanton, The Cherrypickers Guide to Rare Die Varieties, as FS-901 and FS-902, the latter of which is said to be a later state of the same die with the eagle's tail feathers re-engraved.  I provided a link to the NGC VarietyPlus listings for this variety in your other topic. NGC's description of it is "[a] lint impression from the die cleaning process appears on the eagle's breast in the shape of a letter "S", reminding some of Superman's signature mark."  Here is NGC's photo of the so-called "S":

P

 

  Jaime Hernandez, writing for PCGS CoinFacts, claims without citing any evidence that "it is strongly believed that a Mint employee, who was probably also a big fan of Superman himself, deliberately struck an S mint mark on the reverse die of a 1952 proof Washington quarter." Hernandez also states the belief that about 20% of 1952 proof quarters, or 15,000 pieces, were struck with this characteristic. See 1952 25C "Superbird" FS-901 (Proof) Washington Quarter - PCGS CoinFacts.  According to Hernandez, they are only considered to be rare as "deep cameo" or "cameo" proofs.

  In my opinion, the "S" is a lint mark as stated by NGC.  Such marks are common on older U.S. proof coins, whose dies were apparently cleaned with cloth rags.  As I mentioned in the other topic, a 1952 proof set that I bought in 1996 happens to contain a quarter of this variety.  I only noticed it when I had the proof set out of the safe deposit box a few months ago. It's really not a big deal, although there are collectors who pay a modest premium for it. The PCGS Price Guide lists the FS-901 "Superbird" variety at $375 in Gem PF 66, while a normal proof in that grade lists $325.

Edited February 14, 2023 by Sandon

[VKurtB]

On 2/14/2023 at 8:19 AM, Sandon said:

   We will await your photos of the purported 1952 and 1953 circulation strike examples.  As stated, the only published listing of this variety is for proof 1952 Washington quarters.

   There are two variants listed in Fivaz and Stanton, The Cherrypickers Guide to Rare Die Varieties, as FS-901 and FS-902, the latter of which is said to be a later state of the same die with the eagle's tail feathers re-engraved.  I provided a link to the NGC VarietyPlus listings for this variety in your other topic. NGC's description of it is "[a] lint impression from the die cleaning process appears on the eagle's breast in the shape of a letter "S", reminding some of Superman's signature mark."  Here is NGC's photo of the so-called "S":

P

 

  Jaime Hernandez, writing for PCGS CoinFacts, claims without citing any evidence that "it is strongly believed that a Mint employee, who was probably also a big fan of Superman himself, deliberately struck an S mint mark on the reverse die of a 1952 proof Washington quarter." Hernandez also states the belief that about 20% of 1952 proof quarters, or 15,000 pieces, were struck with this characteristic. See 1952 25C "Superbird" FS-901 (Proof) Washington Quarter - PCGS CoinFacts.  According to Hernandez, they are only considered to be rare as "deep cameo" or "cameo" proofs.

  In my opinion, the "S" is a lint mark as stated by NGC.  Such marks are common on older U.S. proof coins, whose dies were apparently cleaned with cloth rags.  As I mentioned in the other topic, a 1952 proof set that I bought in 1996 happens to contain a quarter of this variety.  I only noticed it when I had the proof set out of the safe deposit box a few months ago. It's really not a big deal, although there are collectors who pay a modest premium for it. The PCGS Price Guide lists the FS-901 "Superbird" variety at $375 in Gem PF 66, while a normal proof in that grade lists $325.

Well and fully said. Frankly, I’m amazed the hobby accepts the FS-901 and FS-902 as legitimate varieties. I think Mssrs. Fivas and Stanton must have hit a dry spell and noted this one out of sheer boredom. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by VKurtB

[FrederickMorris]

On 2/14/2023 at 6:47 AM, VKurtB said:

So you think you have non-proof Superbirds from 1952 and even from 1953? I realize what you do for a living, but these just don’t just manifest out of thin air. They would not be recognized by NGC. 

seems od that they would not be recognized. I have had them for years just never really gave them much thought as I believed them to be known. From my minor research most grading pro's refused to acknowledge them at all for the longest time. Seems strange that as they are aware the coin exists that even today they avoid them??

[FrederickMorris]

On 2/14/2023 at 9:39 AM, VKurtB said:

Well and fully said. Frankly, I’m amazed the hobby accepts the FS-901 and FS-902 as legitimate varieties. I think Mssrs. Fivas and Stanton must have hit a dry spell and noted this one out of sheer boredom. 

Is this forum always so rude, if so, it's no wonder collecting is dying. I am trying to interest a small group of 20 year olds but these replies would not enlighten them, educate them or inspire them.  I will pull the 1953 from the safe and get it under the scope, it is by no means lint.

Rev MOrris

[RWB]

On 2/14/2023 at 9:19 AM, Sandon said:

"it is strongly believed that a Mint employee...struck an S mint mark on the reverse die of a 1952 proof Washington quarter."

That is complete nonsense.! The NGC comment is better, but remember that lint, like most other "struck through" items is soft and transient. Rather, I suspect a small steel fragment landed on the reverse die (in the bottom position for proofs), and stuck to the die for enough blows to deform metal, before falling off. [This should have produced 1-5 coin with an incuse defect identical to most strike though impressions. Once the fragment fell off the die, the defect would be raised on the coins made from that die.]

Edited February 14, 2023 by RWB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/14/2023 at 2:02 PM, FrederickMorris said:

Is this forum always so rude, if so, it's no wonder collecting is dying. I am trying to interest a small group of 20 year olds but these replies would not enlighten them, educate them or inspire them.  I will pull the 1953 from the safe and get it under the scope, it is by no means lint.

Rev MOrris

We are a very helpful group with STRONG opinions.  If somebody is a novice or beginner, we will NOT ridicule them -- in fact, we'll go out of our way to help them.

But likes and dislikes here are often strongly and emphatically stated.  As an example, I am a gold coin afficionado and love collecting, reading, and researching about Double Eagles (1850-1933) but some on this site not only don't like them but they dislike gold as a metal per se and are not shy about expressing it.

Some people here might disagree with you....others might agree with you.  And either group might show up and post that -- or not.

Lately, we have many new members here who are "1-and-dones" -- they post about a supposedly rare or valuable coin that they have and want to know how much it is worth and can we verify it.  99.9% of the time, it's worth face value or less. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[RWB]

On 2/14/2023 at 2:02 PM, FrederickMorris said:

Is this forum always so rude, if so, it's no wonder collecting is dying. I am trying to interest a small group of 20 year olds but these replies would not enlighten them, educate them or inspire them.  I will pull the 1953 from the safe and get it under the scope, it is by no means lint.

Rev MOrris

Members were simply replying with the information they have, and since you question that information, it is your task to post evidence of your position. Just because someone informs you of the accepted name for a variety, and adds that few collect this coin, and it's only known as a proof, you appear to have labeled the "forum" as rude (to you).

On 2/14/2023 at 2:30 AM, FrederickMorris said:

I have read several places that the 1952 and 1953 Superbird quarters that I have always called "superman" quarters" were only found in proof sets. I don't believe that to be the case at all. I have at least 2 1952 superbird coins not from a proof set and 1 1953, I have had them for years, believe we bought them at an auction. I will have to pull them out and get pictures but they are not proof and are not from a set. Has anyone else found the "S" bird on a quarter that wasn't a proof.

You only posted your question a few hours ago, so I doubt anyone is expecting to see photo quite that soon.... But don't get annoyed when members are skeptical of your claims. (There are technical responses for this -- but let's wait and see your photos...OK?)

And we can all reset the angst.  

[Sandon]

On 2/14/2023 at 2:02 PM, FrederickMorris said:

it's no wonder collecting is dying.

   If this were true, the coins I want would be more affordable and easier to find!  Many aspects of coin collecting have changed markedly and, perhaps in some ways, not for the better since I began collecting in the 1970s, but it certainly isn't dying. If you're referring to the lack of interest of young people in coins, this has usually been the case. I've read an article in an early 1920s issue of The Numismatist bemoaning the absence of young people from numismatics and fearing that collectors would die out.  Although some casually collect coins as children and teenagers, most young collectors put the hobby aside to deal with the demands and expenses of adult life, some never to return.  Then and now, most serious collectors are either people who had set the hobby aside for several decades or only became interested and able to take the time and afford the cost in middle age or later.

   More on point to the topic, I don't recall having heard of or read about "Superbird" quarters as a young collector or recall seeing any dealer offer them at a coin shop or show until recent decades. (I have subscribed to and read Coin World since 1973 and read The Numismatist since I joined the ANA in 1981.)  There is no reference to them in Walter Breen's Complete Encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial Coins (1988), which attempted to catalog popular and significant die varieties. My fourth edition Fivaz & Stanton Cherrypickers' Guide (2006) lists only the FS-901 for 1952 proofs, with the description, "[t]here is an unusual S-shaped mark on the breast of the Eagle. The cause of this mark is unknown". The comment reads, "[t]he nickname for this well-known variety, is suitably, 'Superbird'." It is unclear when it became well-known, and to whom.

   It's entirely possible that @FrederickMorris has seen some other, non-proof varieties that are unpublished and not well-known to today's numismatic community, but we cannot offer an opinion without at least seeing photos of it. 

   

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

I have never seen a "Super Bird" that wasn't a proof.  That does not mean that one does not exist.  A picture is worth 1000 opinions. 

Edited February 15, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[RWB]

On 2/14/2023 at 5:03 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

I have never seen a "Super Bird" that wasn't a proof.  That does not mean that one does not exist.  I picture is worth 1000 opinions. 

I got one of those Purdue "Superbirds" at the grocery a while back. Marinated it in cheap whiskey herbs and spices, salt and paprika. Slow roasted it over a political debate....Almost over done! But yummy.

Edited February 15, 2023 by RWB
corrected spelling