My crazy noob question: Any chance this is an impaired proof?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by C-B-D, Jan 10, 2018.

  1. Kentucky

    Kentucky Supporter! Supporter

    I have a "Professional" Red Book and it lists 10-15 proofs for the year.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Mainebill

    Mainebill Bethany Danielle

    I think it’s a business strike that was nailed with fresh dies. Without exactly matching it to a proof die I think it’s impossible to tell. And even then would it be a proof strike or a business strike with used proof dies
     
    Paddy54 likes this.
  4. Paddy54

    Paddy54 Well-Known Member

    I be interested in finding out their souce for that reference, as all of my souces state clearly there's was no written records kept for this year or years before to the later 1850's.
    I'm betting they are basing their data on known TPG grades of known proofs graded,however I caution those stats aren't 100% correct or anywhere near correct.
     
    Kentucky likes this.
  5. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

  6. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    My old Al Blythe shows 6-8.
     
    Paddy54 likes this.
  7. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Except for the die marker, particularly the obverse die lump/dot, that matches perfectly.
    Pretty clear that this coin was struck with retired proof dies, but yes, it is a business strike.
     
    Paddy54 likes this.
  8. Paddy54

    Paddy54 Well-Known Member

    One reference I wish I had available in my collection as well the L & M book.
    I'v have seen them come up up for sale but omg. Moon money.
     
  9. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    I gave about $8, 25 years ago. Mr. Blythe was really cool. He passed about 10 years back. At one time I believe he was posting over on CU.
     
    Paddy54 likes this.
  10. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    But the relationship between the 1 and the dentils is completely different.

    EDIT: And the rest of the numerals as well. I think that is pretty clear.
     
  11. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Yes, but parts of the proof dies were utilized. As I've stated above, the date placement is different on the OP coin. And repunched.
     
    TypeCoin971793 likes this.
  12. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot Supporter

    You're a lot of things, but not a noob, C-B-D. Maybe a little crazy, but not a noob. :)
     
    Kentucky, C-B-D and TypeCoin971793 like this.
  13. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    I missed that part of your post. Oops...
     
    C-B-D likes this.
  14. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Yeah but I'm asking a noob, "am I rich" question?
     
  15. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot Supporter

    your question has more intelligence than you give credit. The fact that you've done some research already puts it leaps and bounds ahead, besides, your argument about the rims makes sense.
     
    C-B-D likes this.
  16. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    You bring up cool questions and find stuff that many would miss. That's fun.
     
    Michael K likes this.
  17. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Thanks, my friend.
     
  18. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    The die lumps you mention between the stars were chips in the master die and they show up on many differerent dies in the 1840's.
     
    TypeCoin971793 likes this.
  19. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank


    I really have to agree, perfect comment
     
    mikenoodle likes this.
  20. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot Supporter

    Love you, Uncle Frank
     
    Treashunt likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page