Does anyone have theories on why 1974 Brown Ikes target tone more evenly (nicely?) than other coins in the short series (40% silver)? Did they change the packaging on the brown box that year? Did the seals change? Did the Mint mention any changes in composition for the 20% non-silver part of the outer shell?
A lot of the Brown Ikes develop a haze around the perimeter when not stored properly, and this haze can darken over time. Do you have photos? Chris
I own a couple of the 90% brown box Ikes and was lucky enough to get them haze free. In response to the OP, I wonder if it's the reduced silver content that allows them to tone more evenly.
Because of the stringent specifications and controls on silver coining stock, my best guess is that the toning relates to a change in the packaging, over which there were doubtless much looser controls.
The haze, the toning, of the Brown Ikes, just like with any other coin, has about a million different variables involved. Yes the metal content of the coin and the packaging are 2 of those variables, but only 2 ! Everything else had, and still has, an impact as well. You have to consider how many different people may have owned that specific example you are looking at, and for how long they owned it, and where they were when they owned it, and what the conditions were where they owned it, and how they stored it, etc etc etc. All of these things combined will determine what the coin looks like now, today. A year from now it very well may, or may not, look differently. Just like it probably looked differently a year, 2, 5 ago.
Whatever you paid, I'll double it. No. I'll QUINTUPLE it just to be able to own a 90% Silver Brown Box IKE since all the Brown Box IKE's are only 40% Silver Clad where the outer layer is 80% Silver/20% Copper and the core is 20% Silver and 80% Copper. As for 1974? My guess is in the rinse since the final rinse for these coins pretty much dictates what happens over the long run. For whatever reason, the rinse was even enough across the surface of the coin to cause some type of reaction with the black plastic housing the coin was in. 1971-S 40% Proofs had a tendency to turn Blue while 1972-S 40% Proofs had a tendency to turn green. 1973-S went back to blue and the 1974-S coins just went to the moon. 1974 has some beautifully target tones 40% Silver Proof coins, some fairly hazed up 40% Silver Proof Coins and then the standard run of the mill 40% Silver Proofs. Of course, the downside to some of this toning is that PCGS will no longer designate the coins as Deep Cameo since the haze/toning kinda destroys the "deep" factor. 1974 was an interesting year in that the "S" Mintmark punch broke early in production and was replaced with a different punch that actually had doubling. The mint marks are referred to as: MMS-1 (Scarce) MMS-2a (Common) MMS-2b (Rare) MMS-2c (Common) They look like this: MMS-1 matches the Mint Mark on the 1973 and earlier coins. MMS-2a has a little notch in the upper loop of the S MMS-2b has the notch plus a serif split on the upper outside serif. MMS-2c has the notch, the split and what appears to be doubling on the upper loop. MMS-2c had been referred to as an RPM but was later attributed as simple a doubled punch as the particular "RPM" feature, exists on literally all denominations of well struck 1975/1976 coins. As such, it simply could NOT be an actual RPM as much as a doubled mintmark punch. However, you can still find 1974-S 40% Silver Proof IKE Dollars slabbed as "RPM" or "S/S".
Thanks 19Lyds. That explanation is along the lines of what I was looking for, as I noticed a similar pattern of: 1971 white/blue 1972 yellow/green 1973 white/blue 1974 HOLY CRAP THAT'S GORGEOUS!!! I didn't know about the punches. Thanks for that info and the clear pictures!
This has been an informative thread. What color do 1976 silver proofs come in? Also, I was not aware PCGS doesn't designate DCAM on Ikes if the toning impairs the mirror effect and contrast. That is a recent change? PCGS has in the past and is still currently designating DCAM on colorfully toned proof Silver Eagles even if the toning inhibits the mirrors and contrast, so why they wouldn't on Ikes is beyond me.
I believe that you may be mistaken since toning in the fields does not allow for "Heavy contrast between the fields and devices" which is a requirement for a Deep Cameo designation. They may go CAM but not Deep Cameo. This has not always been the case as 7 years ago, a PR69DCAM was simply given out like candy and there are many of those coins floating around. It is much different today.
skylar, first off, welcome to Cointalk. Thank you for posting your example, however, for Ikes, I don't think the planchet and die preparation allowed for such extreme field and device contrasts when the coins toned.
Sorry to the OP if I took the topic a little off course. I was proving a point that PCGS still grades rainbow toned proof coins, at least Silver Eagles, as DCAM. When I was told I was mistaken, I provided photographic proof. 19Lyds you are the one who is mistaken; rainbow toned proofs, at least Silver Eagles, can get that DCAM designation. Your latest reply is confusing to me. ?? Why they do not grade rainbow toned proof Ikes as DCAM any longer is beyond me and seems to be a double standard. Either do them both or neither.
PCGS has no problem designating a 66 as DCAM but a 68 or 69 is something altogether different. And the IKE's are next to impossible to get a 69DCAM with a bunch of toning in the fields. Perhaps if you'd shown a 69DCAM Toned IKE that has been recently graded your replies would have some punch but posting a less that adequate Proof Silver Eagle as evidence just does not address my statement about toned proof IKEs, specifically 1974-S Coins, with heavy toning.
