GTG Interesting 1910 Wheat

Kevin Flynn's book is the best but not very specific on the 1910. I think it is the toughest to attribute as it had a mintage of over 4000. There isn't a definitive marker except the die scratch under the M.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

@robec I would love to know your opinion.

 

Thanks I will have to keep an eye out for one.

One thing I noticed was that there was a pretty large cluster of polishing marks between the E and T. But that was only in the photos were the area was lit well.

 

Yeah the line through the E in WE is what made me buy this coin. It's really all I could see from the seller pics. And there are examples showing that same line. This coin is fascinating.

 

Do you resubmit and hope to get the matte proof?

 

I took some shots of mine showing some of the diagnostics.
I can see your die scratch at the bottom of the M in UNUM.
One thing to check is to see if the S in TRUST has extra metal inside the loops.



There is also a die scratch inside the C, not the diagonal line that we know about. This one is straight north and south just inside the C.


The die scratch under the M


Die Scratches between the U and M extending through the U to the N


Die Scratch trailing from the S in PLURIBUS towards the bottom of the U


Die scratches between the I and B in PLURIBUS


There aren't that many obverse diagnostics that I could see.

You already have the WE diagnostics, but I'll post a pic



There is suppose to be a die scratch under the L in LIBERTY. I'm not sure if it this is it or not........sorry. Bottom of the L closest to the rim.

 

Not sure yet. If i do, it wouldn't be to NGC

 

Did any of the diagnostics show on your 1910?

 

From what I can tell with my little 10x loupe, im at work at the moment so no access to anything stronger, I can see all the dies scratches except for the one by the C and I cant tell about the S in TRUST.

I see all the other scratches though

 

I didn't reply before the unveiling....But was thinking how this looked like a proof strike.
Now not a series that I am that familiar with I didn't reply.
But yeah a matte proof very possible, or no less struck ms coins with proof dies.
Nice coin

 

The one by the C is tough to see. You have to do a lot of moving the light and coin around, but there is a sweet spot were it becomes visible. The filled in S is a key diagnostic though. It is very easy to spot.

Here are two views of both scratches within the C

 

Thanks I will look when I get home

 

Confirmed my coin has all the die scratches you have shown.

 

Well send that baby in!! I would even be tempted to crack it out and submit it as an MPL.

 

Well like I said I already contacted NGC with my pics and they said they think is was struck with retired proof dies. So idk if they are the ones to send it to again. ANACS maybe? Or PCGS?

 

Could they be correct?

 

How are the rims are they squared on the inside as well as outside. If they are beveled at all NGC might have a point, though I'm not sure that the mint ever used MPL dies for circulation.

 

Rim's are pretty square even with nice fins too. The edges are definitely thick and square and even have that bit of reflectiveness like a proof.

I've never seen a coin struck with mpl dies used for circulation but have heard that it's a possibility. Here say mostly.

I mean wouldn't there be examples of circulation strikes struck with mpl dies, cause I haven't seen one.

 

Here is a link to an almost 11 year old thread. It's an interesting read. Page 2 talks about a proposed diagnostic for the 1910. That being the second 1 in the date being recessed. Supposedly this only was seen with the MPL.
https://forums.collectors.com/discu...estions-for-matte-proof-lincoln-collectors/p1

 

Wow amazing read. Now Im gonna be looking at all my early MS Lincolns tonight. That C scratch is fascinating.

As for the recess on the second 1, I can see that on my coin under my scope. Also I never thought about MPLs not having flow lines, makes perfect sense, there are no flow lines on this coin either.

Why would NGC blow me off about this being a legit matte proof?