Need some help, 1972NoFG - 1982 NoFG die markers....need a resource for them

There is a thread in here that shows the die markers for the 72 NoFG.

See here:

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-greased-kennedy-and-a-nofg-the-greaser-rocks.246597/page-2

It as a great example done by a member that shows these tell tell signs it is a legit NoFG.

Example:








I remember somewhere seeing the same type of thing for the 82P NoFG. I try my GoogleFoo skills and came up empty.

Does anyone have a link that discussed these in detail? I would like to PDF them for future needs. I should have done that the first time and I thought I did but I can not find it.

Thanks

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I looked (quickly) through the CPG & James Wiles' book on Kennedy's and there was no mention of the die polishing lines as obverse markers. I was always under the impression that markers from one side could not (usually) be used to validate the a variety on the other side because it could possibly be used with other dies.

Is there any info to validate this obverse marker?

Chris

 

I remember someone posting die markers for the 82P but for the life of me I can not find it. There were sure fire markers and I saw them in the coins I have or lack there of...I was hoping someone see's this and has that site/information bookmarked.

 

Ah I think I found it!

*Pic of the 1 in the date is a die marker for helping anyone who is looking for one of these while roll searching halfs. The base of the 1 is missing. *




http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=69348

 

Virtually every example I have had in my hands had those obverse die markers and I do understand that die marriages come and die marriages go but the age of this particular die marriage tells me that both were retired at the same time. And yes, this is usually what I preach!

These coins are truly ugly in Mint State condition as a lot of the specific details have been abraded off the coin. The stars below the Eagles Tail screams: WORN COIN! WORN COIN!

Additionally, the die scratches on the obverse are interpreted by many as scratches on the coin.

As such, many were typically thrown back into the bag without much consideration.

My very forst example came out of a roll I purchased on eBay which graded MS63. An XF45 coin sold, around that time, on Teletrade for $345 so I was quite pleased. I traded that coin for a couple of grand worth of MS66 40% Business strikes AND a 1972/72.

I figured, I found one once, I can find another one!

WRONG!

These are really tough to find in MS and forget about finding one in a slab since I seriously doubt that anybody would ever submit one for grading without that specific attribution.

Anyway, back to the subject, yes, this particular die marriage has proven to be consistent and while Wiles Book does not mention the die markers on the obverse, it doesn't mean that they aren't consistently there. All based upon what I've seen.

 

Thanks!

Chris

 

Question - are the NoFG 72's all that bad? I find 72D that look MS63+ at times but all of my 72D NoFG's do not meet the die marker. I think three out of 10 did. Begs the question though on rareness. If that 'bad' die was just started and used then a few would have come off very nice. I think I understand your point as being the die is worn as many of the 70's are but there are really nice ones also, think 71D's. If what you are saying is these NoFG's came from a worn die set then it would make sense.

I started filling books (non proof) when I started CRH again. I am working on my 6th one now, well maybe call it 6.5 as I have a short book also. I pull nice ones in and try to get the best I can. The hardest coins to find are the 70D, never found one in the wild. After that, it is the 87's. Here is the odd part, I find 84's extremely hard to get in BU condition, or AU+ if you prefer. Weak strikes always make me think of 84's. 85's and 86's are not much better but I find them more and 88's and 89's can be fantastic.

So using this as a guide, is that what you are saying about the 72D NoFG as far as quality?

 

What I am saying is that for this "particular" die marriage and die state, the overall "eyeball" look to the coins was not desirable. As such, the coins were passed over in favor of better looking coins.

I am not saying that all 1972-D's were junk as there are many fine examples out there which have been saved and set aside. Just not the pone's with the No FG.

I am also saying that there are many grease filled 1972-D No FG coins but, there is only 1 1972-D No FG coin which is the result of die abrasion. That coin and die marriage, exhibits certain die markers and if those markers do not exist on a 1972-D No FG coin, then it is not a 1972-D No FG. It is a grease filled coin which doesn't count.

 

Got it..thanks