Would you consider this 1970 D Kennedy Half a candidate for PL status?

Not just for Kennedy half dollar collectors, just look at the coins listed in the book "100 Greatest U.S. Modern Coins" and you will see the Kennedy 1970-D listed.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Dead on !!!! */*
1970-D Kennedy half is listed just under the 1964 MS /Proof Kennedy half .

 

It actually would be impossible for anyone to say yes or no on PL designation based on an online photo.

Only YOU could determine that as you have the coin in hand. Simply hold the coin by the edge, at the end of a ruler. If you can see 2"-4" clearly in the reflection of the fields, it could be a PL.

 

Okay...I'm back home, and I've tried to capture the surfaces of the coin a bit better, but it's definitely been a challenge.

The coin looks much better than a BU 40% Kennedy Half, but isn't nearly as mirrored as a Proof Kennedy Half. Definitely somewhere in between. I'm not saying it's a 66 (it isn't, I think I agree with the 64 that's been offered here and at the NGC boards.)

Here is the coin at an angle:



And here it is with me gently holding it on the edges so you can see the reflection of my fingerprints in the fields.



Two obverse shots with lights at different angles:




And one more reverse shot:



So, has your opinion changed? Got any tips for photographing PL coins (if my images aren't cutting it?) FWIW - it passes the 2" ruler test, which I attempted to capture in a photo but decided instead to do something that would take less than 3 hours.

 

Here's a good test for PL-
http://www.coingrading.com/plcoins1.html

 

MS 64 NON prooflike. Very nice coin, but from those pictures, there are the hits on the neck and that scratch in a prominent place in the obverse field (over JFK's nose). So, not a gem grade, but solid 64. I see no extraordinary contrast or reflectivity--it looks like a nice BU Kennedy half.

 

With that deep gouge in the hair above the ear, scratch in the field in front of eye along with the shatter on the reverse shield, I would say MS63 at best. From your pictures, nothing looks "Proof Like"

 

That's a flawed test of a PL or even DMPL designation.

PCGS uses the ruler test I mentioned, by holding the coin by it's edge at the end of a ruler. Both sides fields must have a reflection that shows clearly for 2"-4" for a PL designation, and 6" for a DMPL designation.

 

I wasn't aware that PCGS even had a PL (Proof Like) designation for Kennedy half dollars let alone a rule for them?

 

PCGS and NGC both have their standard for determing PL and DMPL for any coin.

It's the same test PCGS uses for Morgans and Peace dollars, and the same for other series that display proof like qualities.

http://www.pcgs.com/nogrades.html

Scroll down to the Designations listing.

 

I'm not sure how where you are getting your information but I think you will find that PCGS only has PL or DMPL designations for the Morgan silver dollar series and recently they have added the large 5 oz silver quarters.

The link you provided sites only the Morgan dollars so not sure how this applies to Kennedy half dollars.

 

NGC will designate other coins, but PCGS will only disignate Morgans to the best of my knowledge.

 

I laughed out loud when I read this comment because I knew caleb and his father are/have assembled one of the best kennedy half collections and when you asked, he just may pull out a MS 67 half that he owned. Dang It couldn't have played out any better.

 

So?? I have assembled a high end Kennedy collection as well. Nothing to laugh about. We both commented accordingly, and nothing played out, unless you dig reading into it.

 

It would be the same test. Just because they use it only on one series doesn't mean it couldn't, or wouldn't, be used for another series.

 

I don't think Czaka's laughing about Caleb's high-end set but rather your suggestive condescending tone when you asked, "have you ever seen a MS 67 70D? lol" And FWIW, I don't think MS66 is a conditional rarity -- late 1950's lincolns in MS67 Red and, as Caleb said, the 1970D Kennedy in 67 are all much more worthy of the "rarity" title. While your high-end Kennedy set may be spectacular I'm pretty sure Caleb's is on a completely different level of its own. Which goes back to why Czaka was "lol-ing"


On topic: The mirror shot with your finger showing in the fields makes me think that it may be PL. But that's an opinion from an ignorant peanut-gallery watcher (I'm definitely not an expert), so I'd probably take Caleb and jallengomez' advice on tests. If you're planning to submit it though, send it to NGC! PCGS doesn't PL/DMPL any coins except for Morgans. Beautiful coin though! The only 70D I've ever had was half covered in white crud in the OGP cellophane, haha.

 

You would have no idea what my high end Kennedy set would look like, so why run your mouth, except for self-aggrandizement? You are talking about "suggestive condescending tone" when you, yourself, are being condescending. I am sure Caleb's set is beautiful, but that isn't the issue here. It is your bugging me about my alleged condescension.

 

Fellas? Testosterone level, higher than it needs to be?

 

http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/OtherSets.aspx?m=5046

 

Enough of this nonsense.