One of the Toughest Washington Quarters in all the Series! -- Grade Revealed--

[Bruceswar]

Ok so you are expecting the 1932 D or 1932 S or even the 1936 D or 1937 S. Well guess again. I am posting a 1955 D Quarter. You may be thinking I am nuts, but if you have ever put together a Washington Quarter set then you will know how tough the 1955 D is. To put this into prepective, there are only 4 Quarters with no prices for MS67 other than the overdates and such. 1932 D, 1932 S, 1934 D Heavy Motto, and the 1955 D According to the PCGS Price Guide. That means NONE have been graded at MS67. There is even a MS67 price on the so widely talked about 1936 D. The 1955 D in my opinion is the MOST undervalued coin in the whole series! If you can pick up a nice coin with a good strike and any luster you should feel very proud. Most of the coins look like MS63 at best and have little to no luster on them at all. After much searching for one I came to terms and found one I liked for my set. Enjoy the picture and guess the grade if you like.

 

 

 

 

The pictures really don't do that coin any justice, but you get the idea. Luster is rather nice, but its not showing up on these images.

 

The grade on this one I think was missed! FLAT OUT MISSED! PCGS Gave this one an MS64, which is too low. It should have been an MS65. Its in a new PCGS holder, which as we all have been hearing they are getting super tight with there grading. Thats ok though, because this one is going to be cracked out soon for my raw set. The images I shot don't really do this coin any justice, strike and luster are better than photoed. We all know that no grading service is 100% perfect, and thus why the collector needs to learn to grade on thier own.

[Excaliber]

Very nice!

[Brotherman]

Yes, as usual you picked out a beauty! MS66?

 

Hays

[ldhair]

Really nice.

I never noticed the price difference from 65 to 66.

Wow, what a jump. Thanks for bringing this up.

[crazyboutcoins-migration]

That is real sweet Bruce. Looks like it was weekly struck which I believe many are in this series. Fields look great so I'm guessing MS 65.

When will the grade be revealed?

 

So which ones are you missing to finish up this series? If I'm not mistaking, didn't you post another one very recently? If so, I'd love to see him again.

[supertooth]

Bruce----One of the things that has always bothered me about collecting in my youth-----was that I never thought about going to the banks to pick up uncirculated rolls of silver coins. After all, I was collecting in 1955. And the 1955 D was hard to find even then. Oh, I managed to get a few in change---nice examples. But there were not ever a lot of them around here in the East. The hunt was always the challenge. I guess going to the banks would have been too easy. And, for a kid of 9 or 10, I had an allowance of 6 bucks a week. I put it all into coins mostly but I was after Walkers and Morgans and anything silver 1940 or before. It just never occured to me that 50 years down the road I might wish that I had done a little differently. I tell my son that, back then, we never thought that silver would, one day, not be in our coins. Life was simpler then---more stable---less volatile. My dad's gross salary was well under 10,000 a year. Heck, today, guys buy 10,000 dollar coins like it was almost nothing. And, back then, virtually noone ever cared what the grade was in those Whitman holders----just that the hole was filled with a 'respectable' example. For, tomorrow, you might find a better one in change. There were no MS grades back then. It was either XF or unc. If the coin was choice, it was Ch.Bu---then somebody invented Gem Bu. An AU coin back then was just a choice XF. In noone's dreams were the grades of 64--65--66--67. If we had known, we would have done differently for sure.

I like your 55D----makes me want to check mine for their grades. Recently, I have been putting some 'extra' sets together. The last 2 coins that I needed to fill the sets, besides the 32D and S, were the 55D and surprisingly the 56D coins. In the end, I had just enough of both for what I was doing---no extras of either coin. The 58 Washington, for some reason, was also a hard coin to find---even when it first came out. Bruce, you start great posts. Makes this old guy think back to how it was back then----a real nice family life. Not the 'rush' of today. Bob [supertooth]

[Bruceswar]

Really nice.

I never noticed the price difference from 65 to 66.

Wow, what a jump. Thanks for bringing this up.

 

And I still think the prices for this coin are on the low side of things. If ever a MS67 gets graded, I would not be suprised with a 10,000 price tag on it. Its just that hard to find.

[Bruceswar]

That is real sweet Bruce. Looks like it was weekly struck which I believe many are in this series. Fields look great so I'm guessing MS 65.

When will the grade be revealed?

 

So which ones are you missing to finish up this series? If I'm not mistaking, didn't you post another one very recently? If so, I'd love to see him again.

 

You bring up weakly struck, which is the normal for a 1955 D. Anything not weakly struck is a super find. This coin is graded by PCGS.

 

As for whats left in my set, 1932 S, 1935 D, 1936 D, 1937 S, 1939 S, 1940 D.

Upgrades 1932 D, 1956 D and maybe a feww more that are not coming to me offhand.

 

I did just show 2 more from my set a 1943 S and a 1952 D(Another Hard one) Also the 1934 LM I scored!

[Bruceswar]

Bruce----One of the things that has always bothered me about collecting in my youth-----was that I never thought about going to the banks to pick up uncirculated rolls of silver coins. After all, I was collecting in 1955. And the 1955 D was hard to find even then. Oh, I managed to get a few in change---nice examples. But there were not ever a lot of them around here in the East. The hunt was always the challenge. I guess going to the banks would have been too easy. And, for a kid of 9 or 10, I had an allowance of 6 bucks a week. I put it all into coins mostly but I was after Walkers and Morgans and anything silver 1940 or before. It just never occured to me that 50 years down the road I might wish that I had done a little differently. I tell my son that, back then, we never thought that silver would, one day, not be in our coins. Life was simpler then---more stable---less volatile. My dad's gross salary was well under 10,000 a year. Heck, today, guys buy 10,000 dollar coins like it was almost nothing. And, back then, virtually noone ever cared what the grade was in those Whitman holders----just that the hole was filled with a 'respectable' example. For, tomorrow, you might find a better one in change. There were no MS grades back then. It was either XF or unc. If the coin was choice, it was Ch.Bu---then somebody invented Gem Bu. An AU coin back then was just a choice XF. In noone's dreams were the grades of 64--65--66--67. If we had known, we would have done differently for sure.

I like your 55D----makes me want to check mine for their grades. Recently, I have been putting some 'extra' sets together. The last 2 coins that I needed to fill the sets, besides the 32D and S, were the 55D and surprisingly the 56D coins. In the end, I had just enough of both for what I was doing---no extras of either coin. The 58 Washington, for some reason, was also a hard coin to find---even when it first came out. Bruce, you start great posts. Makes this old guy think back to how it was back then----a real nice family life. Not the 'rush' of today. Bob [supertooth]

 

 

Super story Bob, and you know that even back then they were hard to find, so imagine now. Thanks for sharing.

[jgrinz]

My Whole collection is raw but the 55d is a nice example exept for the ugle tone and a slight 'jigger' across the cheek. I am happy with it.

The reverse is to die for

 

What ya think Bruce ?

 

[Bruceswar]

Looks like an MS64 to me with that luster, on a hard day MS63 Nice coin for a 1955 D if you ask me. I like it. A few hits limit the grade on this one, but the strile is rather nice. And you are right that reverse is killer.

[cladking]

Before 1950 it didn't matter a lot if people looked for choice coins to set aside or not because average quality from the mint was good and in most cases the range wasn't very great. This changed pretty dramatically in this era but few people seemed to much notice. Initially they just ignored it but by the late 1960's most people just quit saving rolls that were very poor. Lots of people collected these post-'50 issues but most were satisfied with any coin that looked pretty nice and didn't seek out gems or top rated coins. This began to change in the mid-'70's when the typical advice to both collectors and investors was to "buy the best you can afford". Morgans were the first series to be popularly pursued in gem and spectacular grades. This was largely the result of their wide availability in unc and the large range in quality from the finest coins to the worst. By the late '70's this had spread to include most of the 20th century coins with some interest even in the Ike dollar.

 

It's mostly been in the last six years that interest in high grades has skyrocketed. Even the coins that were set aside in huge quantities like the '55-D quarter proved to be very elusive in the highest grades.

 

While this particular coin is very gemmy and very well-preserved, it is not the sort of knockout that most people picture when they talk about finest knowns. The die had seen better days and it lacks the crispness of strike that most would presuppose would be an attribute of the best. It's this way across the board in many of the Washintons minted after 1950. There were incredibly few spectacular coins made and most of these ended up in circulation. Some dates were not saved in large numbers or were saved but have suffered heavy attrition. Assembling nice high quality sets of these is far harder than many imagine. While the '55-D is certainly a key there are some later dates that will prove much tougher in gem if not MS-66.

[Bruceswar]

Super post Cladking! Which coin are you referring to when you talk about the finest known? Mine? Or was that just a mention in total?

[cladking]

It looks like an MS-65 to me because of the die wear. It looks clean enough for a 66 but at those levels you'll usually need a very solid strike from newer dies.

[TomB]

The 1955-D is a very tough issue to find above MS64. The coins generally were not struck well, in my opinion, and were handled very poorly by the Mint. Most pieces are either mushy in the central details, even more than your coin shows, or have relatively severe marks on the portrait. The eagle's knees are also an area that is habitually marked up, though this is common for many dates within this series.

 

A PCGS MS67 of this date will be a five-figure coin if the current market has not collapsed. Therefore, I doubt PCGS will give that type of windfall to someone unless the coin is struck from undeniably sharp looking dies, has incredible blast and a thick skin.

 

Some of the silver dates in the 1960s are in the same league of difficulty as the 1955-D. That is, they are ultra common in MS, but are truly scarce when superb.

 

A date not often written about is the 1945-D and I had a heck of a time finding a superb coin for my set. Bruce, did you notice that the 1945-D was not included in the coins I sent to you? There was a reason for that.

[Bruceswar]

I sure did, the 45 D is another tough one and so is the 61 D and some other issues. The strike on this one is better than the picture shows. This is a coin that I liked for the price I got it at.

[Bruceswar]

So since there was an ask for the Washington I posted the other day, why not a new one instead, that has not been shown in some time. Enjoy!

 

 

 

The grade on the first one will be revealed later on today.

[zrlevin]

Is it MS66?

[Bruceswar]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

[zrlevin]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

 

Whoops...Never mind...I thought your post above mine was the first in the thread...

[MAULEMALL]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

I think he was referring to the big red letters that say MS66 on the pic....

To be honest I missed them till I went up to Really scrutinize it.

[Bruceswar]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

 

Whoops...Never mind...I thought your post above mine was the first in the thread...

 

Thats ok ... Do you agree with the grade I gave it?

[Bruceswar]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

I think he was referring to the big red letters that say MS66 on the pic....

To be honest I missed them till I went up to Really scrutinize it.

 

And what was your assesment of the coin?

[MAULEMALL]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

I think he was referring to the big red letters that say MS66 on the pic....

To be honest I missed them till I went up to Really scrutinize it.

 

And what was your assesment of the coin?

To be honest I was wondering about the Cheek...I can't tell if it's a rub or toning.

[Bruceswar]

My Whole collection is raw but the 55d is a nice example exept for the ugle tone and a slight 'jigger' across the cheek. I am happy with it.

The reverse is to die for

 

What ya think Bruce ?

 

 

Looking again at this coin, I am not sure I would gripe if I saw this in an MS65 slab, but something tells me it would not make into one.

[Bruceswar]

MM, In hand the cheek looks really nice. The luster is almost too much on this coin to photo it well. I think this coin makes a very strong case for MS66. This coin is just super nice in hand.

[zrlevin]

Is it MS66?

 

Did I miss something? I think its MS66

 

Whoops...Never mind...I thought your post above mine was the first in the thread...

 

Thats ok ... Do you agree with the grade I gave it?

 

I do agree...That's a nice coin!

 

Zach

[TomB]

Those are luster grazes on the high points of Bruce's 1950-S, they are not hits or wear, and I agree with the MS66 grade because the coin has blazing frostiness in-hand.

 

As per the other 1955-D that has been shown on this thread, I am not nearly so optimistic about its grade and would think it would max out as an MS63.

[ldhair]

With all the talk about the 55-D, I had to pull this one out.

It probably won't even go 64, but I like it's looks.

[Bruceswar]

Those are luster grazes on the high points of Bruce's 1950-S, they are not hits or wear, and I agree with the MS66 grade because the coin has blazing frostiness in-hand.

 

As per the other 1955-D that has been shown on this thread, I am not nearly so optimistic about its grade and would think it would max out as an MS63.

 

Tom if you saw this 55 D in hand you would get a better idea of this coin. I bet you would agree with me