Title of the post needs no explanation, I'm also interested everyone's critique of the coin as well... @cladking @physics-fan3.14 @SuperDave as always I would certainly appreciate if you weighed in on the discussion
Nice coin but this date comes nice. It looks like a solid 66 to me. I prefer them without the distractions around the edge near the rim but the services don't detract for this.
I really want as many as will weigh in...and I knew you'd be here I was just summoning the clad expert himself and then some folks who I put a lot of trust in when it comes to their eye for grading....an no matter how I say that I'm sure I'll offend someone, but it just comes from more frequent conversations with them than anything... I'm Glad you weighed in for sure!
Nicely struck coin in 65/66 , as I'm now a quarter collector and moderns really don't wow me, I would buy it for a type coins slot .
I can't see how much feather detail there is on the eagle's breast. From what I can see, solid 65. With great feather detail, maybe 66.
I also want to add that this is a relatively common coin in MS. Lots of 1970 Mint sets busted up for the 70-D Kennedy Half.
I'm in at a 66 as well.. It's funny that you posted this particular date and mm. I bought this exact date and mm about two weeks ago, and found out that it was more than likely from a mint set as the reverse on it is known as a Type G which was found on 1968-S proof quarters and is very common in mint sets. Here is the example I bought, I grabbed it for $1.00. My example was struck with late state dies. Your's has an almost proof like finish compared to the one below.
Thanks everyone for weighing in. Here is a better pic of the reverse for the feather detail, I think it gives you a much better look at them. I still don't have a pic of the obverse that I like. Although very clean, the one above makes the fields look more proof like than they are. I realize the commonality of this coin in mint state, in fact this coin is exactly what @mikenoodle said, strait out of mint cello. I have\had a good many of these and as I was going through them a while back I stuck this one aside because it stuck out as a much nicer coin than the rest. For me this is an exercise in learning to grade the clad Washingtonians. They're tough... My heart wants 67 but I knew I'd get 66 from y'all which I'm confident in In hand the coin is eye catching nice, it will be replacing my current 70-D sitting in my Dansco.
I wouldn't rule out 67 based on the first photos but it is solid 66 in my opinion. Any other date 67 would be a shoe-in but this date comes so nice. A lot will depend how it looks in hand and the prominence of the tiny ticks. I know you'd have to go through a great number of mint sets to find a nicer specimen. Roll coins just don't come this way.
Well, I was summoned so I will respond I think your pictures show a 66 coin. I think the pictures are underlit however, and if the lighting was more even (and showed the surfaces better) you may get more 67 guesses. Based on what I see, I'd guess a strong 66 and I wouldn't be surprised by a 67. However, more intriguing to me is how the obverse seems to reflect light somewhat... oddly. This is leading me to believe that the coin has prooflike tendencies. Of course, I can't make any judgement of that based on solely these pictures, but the amount of die polish on the reverse also lends credence to my theory. There are a few dates between 1968 and 1972 that are known for prooflike coinage across most denominations, and 1970D is one of the most common. So, I can't tell if it is PL, or just semi-prooflike, or 66-67, but this coin is intriguing enough to me that I would like to see better pictures.
I'll see what I can pull off tomorrow. Maybe the photo gods will smile on me and I'll get some better pics.
