Post an Ike

I've noticed a LOT of the 1975 (1976 T1) Ikes have the golden/orange toning color, as opposed to other years that tend more toward the blues. Any thoughts on the difference in composition of metals or finishing process?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I've noticed the same thing in my short tenure as a collector. My theory? There is perhaps a trace chemical in the plastic cellophane used at Philadelphia that year that produces these deep golden hues. This situation seems to have also happened with the red velvet packaging for 1974 silver proof Ikes. This chemical does not appear to be present in the 1971-1973 issues. Also, it could be a higher concentration of a particular chemical that is producing this effect. I have also noticed that a lot of 76-P T1 Ikes have slivers of random blue toning patterns on top of gold.

1978 is another year that seems to produce nice golden Ikes, some of which look so deep and rich that they appear to be true gold. I have one. I'll try to find the photo.

 

Found those pictures . . . .

Honestly, in hand this one almost looks like one of those gold layered novelty Ikes, but without the "fake" sparkle.

 

Nice Coin! I like it....

 

Yeah, I grabbed that one raw off eBay a long while back and sent it in with one of my submissions. I like the coloring, it actually does show well in hand.

 

Here we go again

 

At least a part of it has to do with design of the coin, in addition to the materials used. Morgans, due to the "hair" accounting for 50% of the obverse, will not show as many hits in the devices as an CuNi Ike ("Ikes" from this point forth reference the CuNi ones) would. Ikes, having about 25% "hair" on the obverse, would have about 50% more revealed surface for marks to show up on.

This is added to the issues of harder planchets, which means tumbling would be less likely to remove planchet marks and more likely to introduce them.

There's also a conspiracy-esque reason related to the pricing on the two. PCGS "type" pricing for Ikes jumps at MS67 and for Morgans jumps at MS65. MS66 Morgans may simply be scrutinized more than MS66 Ikes, since their relative rarity is MUCH higher.

If you were to compare MS65 Morgans to MS66 Ikes, you might find more overall parallels in the grading, since the starting points are different.

That all said, I'm not sure I even agree with the baseline assumption of more hits being on Ikes than Morgans. Again, I think it might be a design consideration, as many Morgan hits are in the busy hair, which might not show at all, as opposed to on the thin hair of Ike.

 

Excellent commentary, NK. I meant to post that '77 MS66 Ike in this Ike thread. I forgot there were two. Is there anyway to merge the two threads?

 

Until lately, I,ve been stockpiling MS 65s and 66s just because of that one grade below moon prices. Even these are becoming much tougher to locate for the scarcer dates, especially toned examples.

 

That info really clears up a lot of questions I had, and reinforces the same opinions from others on on this site. I see you study your Ikes well, I totally agree with your thinking, and will consider your info when buying Ikes in the future. One other point I always consider is eye appeal. For me, a showpiece Ike is either very attractively toned, or has very brilliant surfaces with no distracting marks of any kind. I try to avoid any coin which falls somewhere in the middle.

 

I don't think the two threads will be merged, but I did get back my Ike from ANACS:

 

My latest Ike pick-ups, both from CoronaCoins. The 1978 is an upgrade to my registry set (Darth Morgan). I already have an MS66 1971-S with beautiful toning, but I couldn't resist this 71-S because of the super clean fields. I mean. . . . just look at it! I'm very happy with these.

 

Just a few tiny ticks from 67! I,ve seen 71-s 67 grade Ikes that looked worse than your 66!

 

Nice 71. A solid 66, to be sure. Unfortunately, too much chatter in the devices on the obv and fields on the reverse above the legend for it to do much better.

Also, instead of posting through a third party, why not just link to the PCGS photo? It allows people to see the full resolution imaging:

 

Thanks for the tip, NK. I wasn't aware I could link to the image in this way. How is it done in order to show just the image instead of a link?

 

Above the text box, there is a little photo scene with a mountain range and dot (moon or sun). Click on that, and paste the url there. The same way you insert the photobucket links, but using the PCGS ones instead.

 

OK. Thanks. I'm going to try this in the "latest acqusiti

OK. Thanks! I'm going to try this in the "newest acquisitions" thread with a Morgan that just arrived today.

 

Both nice coins skywalker!

 

Just wanted to revive this thread. This is my extremely modest collection.

 

I love the 71 proof. Pretty coin.