What is a Proof coin with Very Strong Cartwheel Luster called?

If it's definitely a proof strike coin, yet it has a very strong cartwheel luster like a fresh from the Mint BU coin, what is that called? I don't think it would make sense to call it a "proof-like" coin, since a) it is a proof coin and b) that designation is for business strike coins with minimal mirroring requirements.

So, is it simply a poor example of a proof coin, perhaps due to the proof dies needing to be re-polished or wearing out during the last batch of proof strikes? I can also see these series of lines radiating from the center, as you can see from the photos below, which I've seen on many other proof coins, though this is a relatively extreme example of it. Are those radiating lines die wear, which may suggest that the die was being overused for proof strike purposes?

Do we call it a proof coin with proof-like characteristics?

Or is there no term for this? Then, how about calling it a "cartwheel proof"?

...Or a "business-like proof"? lol

Here's an example:

The coin below shows a strong cartwheel luster with those strange lines radiating from the center that I see on some other proof coins. Is that die wear on an overused proof die?



Yet, in the photo below and in-person, the typical mirroring, strong strike, squared rim to edge, etc. are seen.



Thanks in advance!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sometimes there is a simple, uncomplicated answer: Your coin is called a Proof. Sorry about that (no distinction) but it is true. Yours is very nice.

The lines are caused by die wear just as when they appear on MS strikes.

 

But it's so different - you get the best of both worlds:

A strong strike, mirrored proof with cartwheel luster.

It's like a proof-like coin on steroids!

 

Is that doubling on IGWT?

 

Yes - MD?

 

True. And there is one remote possibility; Suppose it is a 1964 25c Type B (Proof Dies). It would be a true "monster" on steroids.

 

It's definitely a Type B from the die markers I see (leaves touching the letters on reverse, and the space between E & S on the reverse).

What if it's a Type B proof reverse business strike quarter, as mentioned in the article below? Were the proof dies ever used for business strikes that year for quarters? Maybe this is that coin, which may explain the strong cartwheel luster on the obverse... ?

So, could it in fact be a "proof-like", "proof reverse", but business strike 1964-P Washington Quarter?

http://www.coinweek.com/modern-coins/us-coins-proof-reverse-washington-quarter-pt-2/

 

I think that is what I said. The Type B quarters were MADE with retired Proof dies. All the Proofs are Type B. Easiest PUP for these is the leaf point ABOVE the arrow. That's the ONLY thing I look for.

Fact: The coin was struck with Proof dies 100%.

This breaks down to: 99% the coin is a proof and 1% it is a MS PROOFLIKE quarter.

 

Isn't the one in the article a proof reverse, with a circulation/business strike obverse, as opposed to either a proof or a proof-like quarter? If they simply wanted to use the proof dies for business strikes, or as an accidental proof reverse die assignment for business strike coins, then doesn't that make it a proof-business strike hybrid? So, proof, proof-like, and business-proof (or proof-like obverse with a proof reverse). Or did I read that wrong, since it's pretty late now lol.

 

That is one of the nicest looking '64 Proof quarters I've seen.

 

@iPen, Think it out. The mint is striking Proofs and they wish to get "fresher" Proof dies. They replace the dies. We know they used the reverse die to strike MS coins. What do you think they did with the used obverse Proof dies?

As far as I know, no one has bothered to record the diagnostics for the Proof obverse dies used on the Type B quarters. I've seen hundreds of these (I collect them when they are "cherries" in a top grade). I for one never bothered to check the obverses either.

With more research (I'm not going to do it), we can probably prove that the Proof obverse and reverse dies were used together and paired with normal obverse dies. So three different varieties SHOULD exist.

 

Proof struck with worn dies that should have been replaced?

 

Quite possibly and therefore 99% Proof. Furthermore, the dies on the OP coin are not that worn. Forgot - IMO, many of the silver Proofs in the 50's and 60's just look this way!

 

Who wrote this? If this post is the new insider I say keep on the new meds. They seem to be working

 

How common is MD on proof coins?

Is that common for that period for these overused proof dies?

 

No meds. I had to pull an "almost" all-nighter. Slept a few hours at work this morning.

So in the words of a famous actor: "I'll be back."

 

IMO, somewhat common, remember they are struck twice (although more carefully) so double (?) the chance...

 

I'm confused by the OP all together...Which coin are you asking about? Or do you just want a name for a proof coin that has cartwheel luster?

The top coin, depicting both obverse and reverse, is, in deed, a business Strike Type-B Washington Quarter.

Pardon me if I'm being pedantic here, but I feel the need to think it out loud like Insider.

The term "mint luster" on BU, business strike coins is in fact synonymous with

Which is synonymous with cartwheel luster. IMO there's a sweet spot which is in the middle of the life of the die where mint luster is the best looking, most eye appealing.

Its not from the early state, when the fields are smoother and less disturbed...before the repetitive metal flow from minting has worn flow lines deep into the die. But its not LDS either, where the devices and letters are all mush and the surface looks like a glacier filed from space.

All BU business strike coins will exhibit mint luster to some degree, but when you find one from this "sweet spot" it seems to bring the coin to life. I digres...

Point being, a proof coin that would exhibit any type of mint luster (as defined by the synonyms above), cartwheel luster, to me is a proof which was struck with VLDS proof dies, which to me, which is a very personal opinion, is somewhat of an impaired proof coin. If I'm looking for a nice proof, I don't want business strike like surfaces...I want deeeeeep smooth mirrored look to the fields and a cameo to the devices. I like it when the the devices look like they are floating in a pool of shallow liquid metal. Again just a personal preference.

*VERY* common. You will find it on a majority of the proofs in some regard. I'm talking Washigntons specifically.

 

The two images below are of the same coin...

 

I am literally thinking it aloud lol. And, some of my questions are rhetorical... to make a point... hence my initial mention that there are proof dies which were recycled for business strike use in general, and my inquiry into whether or not this particular 1964 quarter experienced such practices.

The point, however, is a "third" strike, apart from the point that proof dies were recycled for business strikes - that the Mint, intentionally or unintentionally, used a proof die to create a proof strike on the reverse, while using a business strike die (regardless of whether or not they were originally proof dies) for a regular business strike on the obverse. It would be like having a 2016 silver eagle with a PRooF-70 proof reverse, but an MS-70 business strike obverse. That's what I thought the article was pointing out, unless I read that wrong. Otherwise, I don't see why they'd make a big deal out of it.

3 not 2, right? I'm guessing you're interpreting the article in the same manner as I am when you mention that there are three general types, although if someone can confirm this, that'll be helpful.