My DMPL set so far, about 70% compete

For just one coin? 1880-S or 1881-S in 64 or better depending on how much you wanna drop. DMPLs are common for those years, and usually well-struck.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

For just one coin? 1880-S or 1881-S in 64 or better depending on how much you wanna drop. DMPLs are common for those years, and usually well-struck.

 

good tip! thanks!!

I almost bid on this coin last night, but thought i might find an affordable higher grade? Plus I dont really know what I am doing yet (with DMPL's) so I thought it best to hold off.
I did like the way this looked and it ended up selling for $167.50.
Does anyone know what "Hit List" and "Checkmark" means?



Is this coin typical for a MS63DMPL? I really liked the cameo appearance, but I think that's a common look for these coins. Right?

 

Hitlist is a list of popular VAM's, checkmark is remnants of a 7 under the 8. I am guilty of buying this coin.

 

I am a PCGS kool-aid drinker when it comes to DMPL and PL coins. That being said my favorite is the 79-S. Even the best years of DMPL have mediocre examples so be patient. 1881-S tend to be more brilliant than cameo so they have a different look. Everythking after 1900 is fairly bad due to how the dies were treated differently.

I avoid CC DMPl when I can as there are just too many. The pops are sky high and I dont think they bring as much bang for the buck.

Bottom line be patient. A real deep example will absorb all the light leaving black like the 1884-CC above, compare it to some of the other ones in my set and you can get a sense to which are deeper. Also look at the 1896, that coin is very deep for the year.

 

Sending mine out to get graded this week! Don't think I'm goin to send the 96-O try and get some more opinion about it.

 

Without seeing the 96-o I can say that one is nearly impossible in PL/DMPL. Only 15 examples combined.

When sending coins in for PL DMPL be cautious of the mirror depth and make sure it is consistent. If there is a break in the mirror it will hurt the chances. Right now die polishing even seems to limit the chance of PL/DMPL. I love die polish and have a 78-S that will not cross due to the reverse polishing.

 

you got a nice coin last night blu62, i am glad i didnt bid and drive your price up!

 

thanks for all the good advice merccrazy and blu62vette

i just bought this one ... my first DMPL ... getting a 64 was a little bit of a stretch of my budget but it was so much cleaner than the 63's i've seen ... good tip on the blackness and cameo appearance

The seller held a US Flag in front of the coin to show the reflectivity.

By the way, the seller called this coin both "puffy" and "liquid mercury" ...
are those general well known terms for DMPL coins --
or just some personal jargon of the seller.

i know that it's silly, but I am glad i found an 1881-S DMPL i liked because I already own a toned 1979-S and 1880-s ... but do not own an 1881-S ... and I always cringe a little bit when i buy a date and mintmark I already own (do other people feel that way ... or is it just me).

 

That one looks nice! Reverse pic?

 

Here is the reverse

 

Ooh, purdy. Post some of your own pics when you get it in hand.

 

will do! it's always interesting to see these things in hand and photograph for yourself.

so has anyone ever heard the terms "puffy" or "liquid mercury" relating to DMPL's?
i wasnt sure if those were common terms or just some personal lingo of the seller.

also crazy price break between common date MS64DMPL (mid $300's) and MS65DMPL ($900).
there must be a big drop off in population going to 65 to warrant that increase.

the MS63DMPL (mid $100's) seems to be the relative bargain of the group.
when you find an unusually clean 63, you make out like a bandit.

 

I have not heard those terms for DMPL's but hear the puffy cheek term for Morgans in general.

 

so what does puffy cheek mean? a clean cheek (not too many marks) or something?

Here is another shot of the obverse, without the flag this time.

 

A really well struck morgan has a cheek that is puffy and round. Sometimes it will also have a "S" look to it following the curves of the cheek.

 

Hey Todd, are you bringing any of your DMPL's to Summer Session to use as photo subjects? I'd love to see some "in hand" to really appreciate.

 

I am sure a few will make the trip!!! If there are any you want to try in particular let me know and I will bring them.

 

[FONT=&quot]I asked the seller for some info about this coin (and DMPL's in general) and the terminology he used (puffy and liquid mercury).
I thought I would share his answer with the group as I thought it was interesting.

"First let me say that DMPL Morgans are unique and much rarer than the business strikes. When trying to describe a DMPL to a potential buyer there are many ways to characterize the piece. "Puffy" refers to the look of the portrait being well frosted and appearing to rise from the surface of the coin with depth or...puff. Not all DMPL dollars are created equal either. "Liquid" refers to the fact that the fields appear watery and/or mercurial. Some do not. Some DMPL's are flat and not as attractive. You will see when you receive the coin. I must warn you, they are addictive and you will probably find yourself seeking out other DMPL dollars. Many coins are purchased from large collections and pieced out. We buy most of our coins thru a want list system with some friendly coin dealers and we regularly attend a lot of coins shows."

I did finally reformat the images of the coin posted earlier in my usual way ...
[/FONT](I can see why you collect these coins, blu62vette. They are very striking.)

 

No, those aren't common terms, just flowery words. I don't think they are very descriptive either.

If the cheek is clean or prominent because of contrast why not say that?

Liquid mercury? Besides sounding redundant (though I'm sure the metal has solid and gaseous states too), what does that say? Something about devices moving or shimmering in the light? I'm struggling...
Lance.