1917 Quarter

Discussion in 'What's it Worth' started by dizzyone, Nov 28, 2007.

Page 1 of 2
  1. dizzyone

    dizzyone New Member

    I'll have to say, this is the BEST place to get info on coins and currency! I am amazed at the knowledge some of the folks here have. I've been reading and reading and reading and to say the least, my name says it all. I have information swimming in my brain. I can see my free time getting less and less as I get more into coins and currency. Thanks for ALL the fantastic helpful information!

    Here is another quarter - 1917 that is in pretty nice shape. It is in a cardboard folder like the others.
     

    Attached Files:

    dizzyone, Nov 28, 2007
    #1 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. USS656

    USS656 Here to Learn Supporter

    Nice Quarter!!! - VG 8 Variety 1
     
    USS656, Nov 28, 2007
    #2 + Quote Reply
  4. bzcollektor

    bzcollektor SSDC Life Member

    VG-F, Probably closer to the VG side, someone wiped it...
     
    bzcollektor, Nov 28, 2007
    #3 + Quote Reply
  5. LSM

    LSM Collector

    I would say F-12. I think the obverse comes close to a VF-20 grade in my opinion.

    Lou
     
    LSM, Nov 28, 2007
    #4 + Quote Reply
  6. clembo

    clembo A closed mind is no mind

    Closer to F12 IMHO but cleaned at some point.
     
    clembo, Nov 28, 2007
    #5 + Quote Reply
  7. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    I know absolutely nothing about grading SLQ's, so I looked at Heritage and found this one. IMHO, his SLQ has at least everything this one has. Oh! My picture has been certified XF-40.
     

    Attached Files:

    rlm's cents, Nov 28, 2007
    #6 + Quote Reply
  8. LSM

    LSM Collector

    rml's take a closer look at both pictures of liberties dress. Compare the folds on the dress you'll see more lines and details on the picture by Heritage than the other coin. Also the legs are fuller or more shapely on the Heritage coin.

    Lou
     
    LSM, Nov 28, 2007
    #7 + Quote Reply
  9. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    I don't, but you might. His has more date and more of the veil into her right hand. Even if you want to say it is not as nice, I could see a high VF, but I do not get VG??? or even F12. You might think my picture might be a better coin, but there is not much difference.
     
    rlm's cents, Nov 28, 2007
    #8 + Quote Reply
  10. LSM

    LSM Collector

    Well like I said the obverse looks to me like it would grade VF due to the ware on liberties dress. But the revers has a bit to much wear on the eagles wing. So to me the reverse looks like it's in fine condition. So overall I would give the coin a F 12.

    Lou
     
    LSM, Nov 28, 2007
    #9 + Quote Reply
  11. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    Here is the reverse of my coin. Again, his has more detail on the left, mine has more on the right. You want to say mine is better - fine. I still do not see VG or even F12.
     

    Attached Files:

    rlm's cents, Nov 28, 2007
    #10 + Quote Reply
  12. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I'd put the OP's coin at VG10.

    F12 standards -
    obverse - Gown details are worn but show clearly across body. Right leg is nearly flat and toe is worn. Breast is worn but some mail is visible. Date may show some weakness at top. Rim is full. Outer edge of shield is nearly complete.

    reverse - Breast is worn almost smooth. Half of the wing feathers are visible although well worn in spots. The rim is full.

    Now I will admit that the OP's coin comes very close to meeting F12 criteria, but it's not quite there. And since I am rather strict when it comes to following standards if it aint quite there it just isn't. Thus VG10.

    Now that being said, if you follow PCGS or NGC standards you will come up with a higher grade. But it will be no where near XF40. The OP's coin has considerably more wear than the coin you posted rlm.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2007
    #11 + Quote Reply
  13. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    I usually cannot see the details you see. On this coin, I am seeing what you do not. I do not get it. I see more detail on her right leg than on the one I posted and a complete shield and I see details on the bird breast (especially since the reverse is slightly out of focus) which I do not see on my example.

    All that being said, I do not use ANA standards. I do use PCGS or NGC standards.
     
    rlm's cents, Nov 28, 2007
    #12 + Quote Reply
  14. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    OK - I have placed arrows on specific spots. You compare them point by point. You will see significantly more wear on the OP's coin than on the coin you pictured.
     

    Attached Files:

    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2007
    #13 + Quote Reply
  15. clembo

    clembo A closed mind is no mind

    Add a few Doink doinks and you're John Madden! LOL
     
    clembo, Nov 28, 2007
    #14 + Quote Reply
  16. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Nahhh - I hate football :D
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2007
    #15 + Quote Reply
  17. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    Actually, no I do not see SIGNIFICANTLY more wear where you marked. In fact, on the points I marked on mine, I see LESS wear on the OP's than the XF. I am not trying to say they are both XF, but that they are similar. My guess is that the biggest difference we have is that you would not call mine XF. Just guessing, but you would call my XF a F15 or VF20 at best. Correct? Having said that, I am guessing that if submitted, his would get VF30 to XF40.
     

    Attached Files:

    rlm's cents, Nov 28, 2007
    #16 + Quote Reply
  18. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Maybe I should have circled the spots because to me they are very obvious. Be that as it may, I would say the coin you pictured is a VF30. It matches the ANA criteria for that grade almost perfectly.

    As for the spots you marked, I truly think that only reason it appears there is more wear on your coin in those areas is because the OP's coin has dirt and grime on it which makes those particular places "look" like they have less wear. They really don't. The coin you pictured has a lot more detail left on the entire coin.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 29, 2007
    #17 + Quote Reply
  19. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

    OK Here is a vf30 coin also from Heritage. What part of this coin shows less wear that the OP?. I see none.
     

    Attached Files:

    rlm's cents, Nov 29, 2007
    #18 + Quote Reply
  20. Coinlover

    Coinlover The Coin Collector

    nice quarter! :thumb:
     
    Coinlover, Nov 29, 2007
    #19 + Quote Reply
  21. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I agree, it doesn't show less wear. I think it actually shows more.

    We are comparing apples to oranges rlm, you will never be able to find these coins graded by PCGS or NGC and have them match up to grades based on ANA standards. The standards used by the TPG's are much, much more lenient than those used by the ANA. And that is why I assign lower grades - I use ANA standards. Here's an example.

    ANA F12 standards -
    obverse - Gown details are worn but show clearly across body. Right leg is nearly flat and toe is worn. Breast is worn but some mail is visible. Date may show some weakness at top. Rim is full. Outer edge of shield is nearly complete.

    reverse - Breast is worn almost smooth. Half of the wing feathers are visible although well worn in spots. The rim is full.

    PCGS F12 standards -
    Though Type I and 1925-1930 Type II coins have strong dates in F12-15, the 1917-24 Type II coins may have weakness. The head, breast and shield are slightly blended with the leg worn flat. Only the deeply recessed feathers of the right wing will have detail, as the left wing feathers and body will be worn smooth.

    Now I think that just about anybody can see that there are significant differences in those 2 sets of standards for the same grade. And that the PCGS standards are much more lenient than those used by the ANA.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 29, 2007
    #20 + Quote Reply
10 more messages...
Page 1 of 2
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page