Circulated 1985 Roosevelt Dime - XF40+

http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11252008/ros_dime_1957_1.2.png
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11252008/ros_dime_1957.png
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11252008/ros_dime_1957_rev.png
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11252008/ros_dime_1957_rev_1.2.png

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To much luster for a 25, Scrooge. I'd say a weakly struck coin that the TPGs would grade as a 35 or 40.

 

Looks like a 1957 90% silver to me.

 

Nice '57'. and XF40 to boot.
Woud you please take a look at this circulated '56' giove your opinion on a grade for it. Probably the same as your '57' I hope.------------zg

 

Question - maybe I do not understand something - if the reverse was weakly struck wouldn't that make the rims shallower? And wouldn't that mean less wear to get them worn down to the fields? Just trying to get a better understanding of weak strike.

 

Okay I see what you are talking about. Thanks - now to the other thread with my other question.

 

I don't mean to sound so ignorant but I really am still an ignorant person in coin collecting. Oftentimes stupid. My dad recently gave me a bunch of Roosevelt dimes but really don't know what to do with them. After reading thru this thread I searched through the assorted dimes I have dated 1940s to 60s. A lot of them are toned, some are rainbow toned, VF to BU.

What exactly are the dates to look for? I didn't find any 1957. I found 3 1956s though, 1 toned. Lots of 1964s.

Here are some photos I want to share. Had a hard time capturing the color and details coz Roosevelt dimes are too small! :

 

1956 toned. Grade?

 

I'll bet you another dollar that what you're seeing is the lighting angle and not wear on the rims. If Ruben moves his lights a few degrees in one direction or another, I'll bet a corresponding area of the rims will look "worn".

Ruben, your in-hand assessment would be appreciated -- I'll spilt the proceeds 50/50. Have fun...Mike

p.s. I suspect what you're seeing is the areas of relief 90 degrees to the light position that always look "shallow" because there's no "shadow" or "transition" illuminated by the light. If you look at the original photo, you'll notice the coin was lit from around 10 o'clock. The resulting "shallow" areas around 1 and 7 o'clock are a result of this "flattening" phenomenon and are at 90 degrees to the lighting angle.

 

p.p.s. if this area of the rims were really worn due to circulation, I'd expect the lettering to be MUCH flatter (for instance the tops of F in OF and the A in AMERICA, and bottom of the O in ONE), but it's obvious from the photos that it isn't the case and you can even see a trace of luster in the area. You just don't see (unbent) Roosies with luster in the lettering worn to the rims, or at least I never have.

 

I'll pull it out tomorrow Mike, They are stashed in a jar right now. I promise to hunt it down tomorrow. and also look at the 85 doubling,

Ruben

 

Really?!!!!! Sure? How? or why? I have about 20 of them toned from the bunch. But not as nice as the ones I photographed though. some just grayish or brownish.

 

To be honest with you, there really isn't any "key" dates for the Roosevelt Dime. All of them are fairly common and readily available in high grade. I'd say this series is the easiest to assemble a BU set of. As far as "key dates," I'd say 1949-S, and 1950-S are about it for the silver one's...and they're only worth about $50 or so in higher MS grades. There are also a couple proof double dies (1960 and 1963) and a double die on the 1964-D which is worth a fair amount.

With toning, you can get some big premiums...but it has to have really nice eye appeal and be natural. Those look to me like artificial toning...but I could be wrong.

 

I like them and my son is filling an alblum

 

There's nothing wrong with them...I was thinking about assembling a BU set because it is affordable and within my budget.

 

i was considering Franklins for the same reason