Help needed from the experts 1932d Quarter grade ???

Regardless of anything else, from this seller you can be sure of two things:

A) The images are, at the very kindest, as flattering to the coin as technical photographic skill can make them and it would be difficult for even an expert among us to make the coin look that "good." Mostly because we tend to have morals here.

B) You're going to have to go moon money for it, because the seller has a rabid clientele who bid their items up as if they were every bit as good as they look, and then exceed retail on that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

He got suspended for a day, good enough for me. Just happy to have gotten the coins back.

 

I would not be surprised if it is a cleaned, Au "slider." Buyer beware.

 

While the punch style was the same, the "D's" on the quarter and the dime usually look completely different when the coin is in hand.

 

Actually, no. The mint mark punch was the same punch. Not just the same style, but the same punch on the 1916-D and the 1932-D.

 

Sorry, but Mike is right. The same punch.

 

Actually, NO IT WAS NOT. Didn't you two understand how I used "same" referring to the "Shape & Style." Otherwise, you wish us to believe that ONLY ONE "D" punch was used in the engraving department for almost twenty years.

Furthermore, I stand firmly on my statement above. While the same style punch is "claimed" by respected numismatic researchers such as Dr. James Wiles to be used for all sets of dies on these coins, the "D" on the quarter RARELY looks identical the one on the dime to my old eyes. Probably due to the fact that it was punched deeper into the die!

 

Actually, yes it was. I cannot find anything specific to the Denver mint. but the San Francisco mint had a total of 9 punches during its entire production of business Lincolns. And one was used from 1917 through to 1941.

 

Get real...Since neither of us were there, we'll just disagree on this.

I SAY: The SAME SHAPE/STYLE PUNCH was used during those years - NOT the same punch.

YOU SAY: The EXACT SAME PUNCH produced thousands and thousands of dies over those years without breaking or deteriorating. IMHO....Never mind.

 

That is about 760,000,000 cents for San Francisco from 1917 to 1941 or about 1400 dies (or less). Assuming that was half their production (I doubt it), it would only have done 2500 dies. But those dies were good for 500,000 coins each. Yeah, one single punch.

 

Yes. A single punch.

 

After I speak with one of the retired "horses" I'm going to make you guys eat those words... It will not be pretty.

Until then, do you also believe the BS about the Chief engraver putting the mint marks on coins. BTW, I've seen two carts of dies in the engraving shop at two different desks. It works like this Joe takes the UNIQUE "D" punch and uses it for a die at his station. Then he walks over to Pete's desk and hands him the UNIQUE punch he just used... This is SICK...why even bother...

 

I am getting closer. I won't bother to total the coins minted from 1933 to 1979, but the Denver mint used a single punch for all those mint marks. Suffice it to say there were orders of magnitude more minted than from 1914 to 1932.

Notice that the word used is "punch" - singular.

"VARIETIES: A new mint mark punch was introduced this year for the Denver mint. It was larger and better proportioned and appeared on all cent dated 1933-D to 1979-D"
https://books.google.com/books?id=R...e&q=die mint mark punch denver 1932-d&f=false
page 168 under 1933 Denver.

 

Sure is, and they used lots of "Singular Punches."

 

IMPORTANT UPDATE:

I have spoken with a TPGS consultant and two TPGS error/variety employees about my opinion. They agree with me and think anything different is NUTS! None of the present engravers at the mint have been around longer than thirty years; however, one retired engraver who was there while mint marks were put into individual dies is being contacted (after he returns from Europe). Until then...

For the record, I consider this a waste of all our time.

 

and yet you continue to waste your time chasing the dragon.

I'll tell you this, insider, many times I will say "IIRC" or "If I'm not mistaken", and when there is any doubt in my mind, I say these things.

There was no waver in my post. I am a researcher and a writer and have found this fact in multiple printed sources over the years.

I have no doubt that my original statement is accurate. If you want to continue to waste your time, feel free.

 

Look doodle, If the man who put the mint marks on the dies says he and the other engravers had multiple punches with the same shape/style on their desks that they used (hopefully he will also tell us some of them broke) THEN you may wish to do a podcast and let all the "Johnny-come-lately Ex-Perts" know the truth.

I'm still hoping our discussion is a simple misunderstanding of the shape/style of punches which we all can agree on vs the number of punches (you guys say one) used at the mint during specific time periods.

 

There was only 1 punch used at Denver Mint from 1914-1932.

That's a fact. There's no misunderstanding it.

Is there any limit to your arrogance and disrepect to people? Doodle... Johnny come lately... ignorant... sheesh.

 

Are you certain there is no misinterpretation of the meaning of "one punch"? I'm not doubting what you say, but it's hard to believe one single punch, as opposed to X number of punches of "one" design, was all the Denver mint had on hand for 18 years. I'm not saying it's not possible or one couldn't have lasted, but knowing human nature it's hard to believe that anyone ever in charge of employees would potentially back themselves into such a wall. All honest questions..

 

"There was only 1 punch used at Denver Mint from 1914-1932." Another fractured fact! AFAIK, THERE WERE NO MINT MARK PUNCHES "USED" at the Denver mint.

IIRC (I like this one). IIRC, I think what you should have posted is that in your opinion, the Philadelphia Mint sent dies with a "D" mint mark to Denver that were all produced using ONE SINGLE PUNCH with a specific shape "D" during 1914-1932. FYI, that's one and only one steel punch with a tiny D at its end used for eighteen years without breaking or wearing out. OMG, this from a respected numismatic researcher and writer.

Well, I'll guarantee that the three professionals I consulted (all well-respected and nationally known researchers, writers, seminar instructors, and TPGS variety/error employees/consultants (one a dealer) who have been in all the actively working areas of the Philly and Denver Mints more times than you have fingers and toes disagree with your posts.

Sorry for the sarcasm as you are being a gentleman but it is in my nature. Hopefully, we'll get this settled to our mutual agreement for future collectors/researchers who read this.