• 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.

Reverse Proof $20 - Not a bad looking coin.

Started by Hoot,

25 posts in this topic

Hoot

Hoot

Posted
Posted

I received the 20th anniversary set today (which is already sold), but scanned a few images before mailing it off. The reverse proof is quite a piece to behold, but I remain with the favor of the cameo proof. All three coins were very nice, but here's the scan of the reverse proof:

 

1415920-2006-W%2420gold20thAnnEagleRevPR06-193.1.JPG

 

Hoot

589a915a2fb28_1415920-2006-W20gold20thAnnEagleRevPR06-193.1.JPG.93f21187812395d3fe3a592d095b3e40.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted
Nice coin, but the Liberty's face looks scary to me 893whatthe.gif

 

I gotta agree with Toyo on this one, Hoot. I don't think that it is as cool as I thought it was going to be.

 

Is PCGS doing anything special when certifying these coins? What is their policy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MunkyMan95

MunkyMan95

Posted
Posted

Coin vault has their sets certified already and they are selling them on air. They have a set of 3 69's for something around 7K and 3 70's for 11K. The label has a cool Anniversary theme. The reverse proof reads: 2006 Eagle Reverse PF G$50 or something along those lines, and then under that it says Eagle 20th Anniversary, then there's the grade. No CAM or UCAM on the reverse proofs. They musta had their sets delivered straight to NGC... 3days and they're already slabbed.

 

Here are some images from NGC's website.

 

THREE_PIECE_69_20TH_sm.jpg

20th_ANNIV_sm.jpg

GOLD_SILVER_MS69_20TH_sm.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TomB

TomB

Posted
Posted

The reverse proof was something I thought might be very cool, but unless the coins look significantly different in-hand than they appear in the images I have seen thus far, it truly is disappointing to me. In reality, I think the reverse proof looks more like a chocolate coin than a real coin. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WinstonWare

WinstonWare

Posted
Posted

Does look kinda chocolaty wink.gif And the face does look a little ghostly (as it does in some of the old Saints). I see what people are afraid of. I’d have trouble sleeping with that coin in my bedroom. 893whatthe.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtryka

jtryka

Posted
Posted

AAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Christo_pull_hair.gifChristo_pull_hair.gifChristo_pull_hair.gifChristo_pull_hair.gifChristo_pull_hair.gifChristo_pull_hair.gif

 

That is NOT a $20 coin!!!!! Why do you insist on insulting ASG's work by comparing it to this shabby modern interpretation by the US mint?

 

Double eagle = $20 = 0.9675 oz. pure gold = 1.075 oz. 0.900 fine gold.

 

This thing = $50 (yeah right) = 1.0000 oz. pure gold = 1.091 oz. 0.917 fine gold.

 

sign-rantpost.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Dawg

DC Dawg

Posted
Posted
That is NOT a $20 coin!!!!! Why do you insist on insulting ASG's work by comparing it to this shabby modern interpretation by the US mint?

 

Hey jtryka, calm down! Grab a cup of coffee and relax.

 

An article that appeared in (I think) the Numismatist when the American Eagle program started in 1986 that said the mint was using the archived master hubs used for the Saint-Gaudens double eagles and the Weinman Walking Liberty halves for the obverse of these coins. I had a copy of the article, but I cannot find it at the moment. foreheadslap.gif

 

The American Gold Eagle is not a "shabby modern interpretation by the US Mint." It is Augustus Saint-Gaudens's design, just enlarged for the one-ounce coin. If you've ever played with digital pictures, you will know that sometimes changing the size can slightly alter the image, even if you don't change the spect ration.

 

Now... relax and just enjoy! It is still a great design! popcorn.gif

 

Scott

 

takeit.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgrinz

jgrinz

Posted
Posted

Got the Reverse Proof In Hand ... Well not literally smile.gif

I am not impressed .. Luckily it was purchased for retail sale in 3-4 years so It doesn't bother me.

No I am not certifying them

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtryka

jtryka

Posted
Posted

The mint made a number of changes to the original designs for the bullion coins, and the most minor change was the resizing for the bullion coins (the 1-ounce eagle is actually smaller than a double eagle, 32.7 mm vs. 34 mm). The mint also adjusted the shape of Liberty, making her noticably thinner than she appeared on the double eagle design (you don't get a thinner Liberty by shrinking the diameter). They also lowered the relief from the low-relief version of the double eagle.

 

Is this a shabby modern interpretation by the US Mint? Well, let me correct my initial statement, this is a shabby modern interpretation by the US Mint of Charles Barber's shabby interpretation of Augustus Saint-Gaudens' original design.

 

Am I overreacting? Probably, but I collect this series and I am a purist. There may be many Buffalo nickel collectors that loved the silver dollars of 2001 and the $50 gold coin, but there are probably many others that think it's a bastardization of the original design. There are probably many Saint collectors that think the gold eagles are fine coins, but I am clearly in the opposite camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SPD-migration

SPD-migration

Posted
Posted

PCGS will be designating the coins "First Strike" and 20th Anniversary Set. They must be submitted unopened. If I understand them correctly, only the unc and the reverse proof will be designated "First Strike". I don't see how they can for the regular proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Dawg

DC Dawg

Posted
Posted
Am I overreacting? Probably, but I collect this series and I am a purist. There may be many Buffalo nickel collectors that loved the silver dollars of 2001 and the $50 gold coin, but there are probably many others that think it's a bastardization of the original design. There are probably many Saint collectors that think the gold eagles are fine coins, but I am clearly in the opposite camp.

 

I love the Buffalo nickels and take every opportunity to hoard nice examples. I just sent a series of 1930s Buffaloes to be graded. I am hoping they come back in the AU-55 to MS-62 range.

 

I did no like the 2001 silver coin. It was not faithful to the design. The $50 gold coin is very faithful to the 1913 Type 1 coin. I have one 1913 Ty1 graded as MS-61 that I used as comparison. It is beautiful and I am really impressed that the Mint did it correctly.

 

I am not rich enough to own many gold coins. I have a few of the 1/10th ounce gold Eagles and do not own a Saint, so I don't have anything to compare it to. But remember, the design went through three changes from the original. The ultra high relief was not considered mintable for the volumes necessary at that time. Even the high relief had problems. If nothing else, Barber did "flatten" the coin so it could be minted. He didn't do a bad job, but there is a difference between the the high and low reliefs.

 

Oh well... I am sorry yuo can't appreciate the coins for what they are. The silver and gold eagle designs are better than anything else in circulation!

 

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing