• 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.

Errors?

10 posts in this topic

I found these in my change and they've been sitting around in my house a while. This first one seems to be a clipped cent, but I am not sure if it was done at the mint or afterwards. Any opinions?

901198-MVC-522S.JPG.798b227125183c1c245160e1d257746e.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff,

 

The one at 3:00 is a straight clip and the one at noon is a small curved clip. They occurred during the punching process of the planchets wherever they were manufactured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

p.s. I checked out your Saints again. What an incredible accomplishment!!

 

Is it true that the 1928 date is the best coin for type because of the great eye-appeal and relatively low cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

p.s. I checked out your Saints again. What an incredible accomplishment!!

 

Is it true that the 1928 date is the best coin for type because of the great eye-appeal and relatively low cost?

 

Thanks for the kind words Victor. Yes, the 1928 is generally ranked up there with the 1927 and 1923-D as the best looking in the series. Here is a quote on the 1928 from Akers' book:

 

"From an overall appearance standpoint, the 1928 is typically one of the best of the series, virtually on par with the 1927 and 1923-D and generally superior to the 1924, 1925 or 1926. The 1928 is always very sharply struck. This issue was clearly minted to a very high quality standard. The surfaces are fully frosty or slightly satiny and the luster and color are invariably excellent. With such a large number of specimens in existence, color obviously varies rather widely, but the vast majority are a light to medium greenish or yellow gold color."

 

Personally, if I could choose only one, I would go with the 1916-S, as it is a slightly better date, and has terrific beauty. Akers decribes the 16-S as follows:

 

"The 1916-S seems to have been minted to a very high standard of quality. The strike is almost always very sharp and the surfaces, although they occasionally show signs of very fine granularity, do not have the metal flow problems encountered on many examples of the 1915-S. Luster is always very good to excellent and the color is usually a very appealing rich greenish gold, sometimes with a light orange or coppery tint. High-grade examples of this issue invariably have great 'eye appeal.'"

 

The fundamental differences between the two I would describe as follows, the 28 generally has a sharper strike, with little granularity giving it a softer luster. The 16-S has a strike that isn't quite as sharpe, but with the granularity it is more likely to exhibit a bright, flashy or "blazing" luster. Just my 2c!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, Jeff, that is another thing that I use your registry set for: an education. I know that most all dates have their own uniqueness and I'm using your photos to learn these subtlies. Thanks, bud! Man, that's an expensive library. crazy.gif Seriously, though, I can see your point between the 16 S and the '27 & '28, but I still find your photo of the 1928 date my favorite. No '23 D, though. Don't have a price guide on me. Is this a more expensive date?

 

Your education helped me alot. I'll eventually try to finish my gold type set, too. But, for now, I'm laying the ground work for future purchases.

 

Thanks alot, Jeffries!! hail.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it is an expensive library! But hopefully it will have better resale value than my old college textbooks! I'm glad you are learning from my registry set, it's one of my main goals since there's little chance of me taking the #1 spot anytime soon. I've actually had positive comments about my set from a few collectors with sets far ahead of mine in the rankings, which is very gratifying. As for my empty spot on the 23-D, it's just an empty common spot as the 23-D is the only common branch mint Saint from the 1920s. It's just like the holes I have for the 1911, 1923 and 1925, just waiting to be filled. I might actually focus on them when I am ready to make my next purchases as the better dates are becoming harder to find and much more expensive! The 24-S has more than doubled since I bought it, likewise the 25-S. There are some that I might go for like the 26-S or 24-D, but we'll see what happens when my Saint budget is replenished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites