Dateless Type 1 Standing Liberty Quarter

I know the pictures aren't much to go by, but do you think this one has a shot at being a 1916? The diagnostics appear to be there from what I can see. I will have better photos in a few days.

thanks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think you have the real thing. The fold in the gown to the left at the feet looks correct, and the crease in the sash across the body extends past where the vertical row of stars are located.

Link to ANACS article: http://www.anacs.com/(X(1)A(SGuboMo...icle.aspx?ID=16&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

 

The image is small, which makes it hard to tell, but it looks like it has a shot. First thing I look at on those is the hair.

Here's an example of a coin even more worn than yours which was identifiable as a 1916: http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=256&Lot_No=7171

 

Quick question guys. Assuming all diagnostics are correct, and it is determined that the piece is the date in question, the coin is still lacking a date. Will a tpg'er slab it?

 

Looks like ANACS did anyways: http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=360&Lot_No=6558#Photo

 

Wow, that sold for $1495 back in 2005? It's truly incredible to me that someone would pay that much for a coin that lacks a date. I know it's rare but what's even more rare is a date on this coin.

 

Wow, very interesting. :thumb:

Regards,
Stan

 

yes, ANACS will.

 

OK, how 'bout the other two guys?

 

Yes, I have a dateless 1916: PCGS 5704.02/21430001

 

Even G-4 1916 quarters are practically dateless for the most part, then it starts getting near or above 3K. And yes, all of the services will slab a dateless 1916, as the diagnostics are unmistakable in hand.

 

Awesome! Care to post a picture? I would guestimate that mine(if genuine) would grade FR-02 as well.

 

Nice one !!

 

Ok, I have to ask. I clicked on the link and the dateless SLQ does not match any of the diagnostics for a 1916 in my opinion. The shield rivet detail is wayyy to clear, and the other diagnostics don't match either. I disagree with their assessment of "1 hair strand", as I've looked at hundreds of dateless 1917s and they all look like that. The 1916 is very distinct with the large single hair curl.
All of the anacs certified Po1 and FR2 ones match, but this one just doesnt. I don't want to presume that I know more than Heritage, but did they screw up?? Or am I just losing it? I think someone got screwed on that deal. :-(

 

The Heritage coin looks ok to me. The 2 diagnostics of importance in coins this worn are (1)the shape of the drapery to the left of Liberty's dexter (her right) leg, and (2)the visible crease in the sash below Liberty's dexter (right) arm which extends well to the left of the location of the vertical row of stars on the wall/bulkhead.

 

I want to make sure we are looking at the same coin, because I see none of those diagnostics on this Heritage coin:
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item...56&Lot_No=7171
It screams 1917 all the way, especially the shield details. However, Heritage calls it a 1916; soo.......

 

I was referencing the coin in post #5.

 

Ok, I agree with you on that ANACS PR1. Definitely genuine. The raw one on Heritage referenced by swhuck(post #3) is the one that really bothered me.

​

 

Alas, my fair maiden hath arrived. And she is quite "fair", wouldn't you agree??

I am 99.99% sure this is a 1916. All of the diagnostics match, and there is even enough detail to see the broken beads over her head. There are a few wispy scratches on the obverse, but they arent very noticible and I think they are allowed given the coin is no better than FR-02.

WOOHOO!

 

Told ya!! LOL

Congrats! So, how did you come by this fair lady?