I recently acquired a rather large batch of BU Franklin halves as part of a collection I purchased. Several of the pieces had grades written on the holders. By no means do I believe these grades to be true though I also admit to be unfamiliar with the grading st dates of Franklins. I would love any input on the coins pictured below. Thanks in advance! View attachment 1516880 View attachment 1516881 View attachment 1516882 View attachment 1516885 View attachment 1516888
View attachment 1516891 View attachment 1516892 View attachment 1516894 View attachment 1516896 View attachment 1516897 View attachment 1516899
It's too many coins for my poor brain to process in one post. You should really have to hunt to find a mark on an MS-67 graded coin. It should also be a superior strike for the issue with great eye appeal. That would rule out the first coin which seems to have a mark above Franklin's forehead and minor ones in the fields. The 1953 with the big mark in the left field is also not an MS-67. The 1955 "Bugs Bunny," with the figures in the photo, with the big marks on Franklin's head, is not even close. It's like an MS-62.
I agree with John - too many coins for a single post. As a general rule, one good picture per side is sufficient, and try to limit it to 2 or 3 coins per thread (and, the OCD in me has to mention - post them in order, lol). Get some answers, learn what you're looking at, and then post another couple the next day. That strings out the fun for us, and you'll get better responses. Anyways, I think we can all agree that "67" is fanciful. Here's my analysis using my SLEC method (strike, luster, eye appeal, contact marks): 1955: Clearly a Bugs Bunny. Always in demand, no matter the grade. Strike is pretty good, the die clash is clearly evident. Flattening over bottom lines to left of bell crack means no FBL. Luster is bright; Eye appeal is helped by just a bit of golden toning. Contact marks kill this one: gash on his head, on his eyebrow, and numerous small contact marks throughout. This one gets a 64. 1953D: Average strike. Would be FBL, except for mark at far right (although I've seen that get through). Dull luster, common for the date. Eye appeal is average, nothing great, nothing bad. Huge contact marks behind head, on shoulder, big gashes on bell. Lamination error on the lapel. I'd call it 63. 1953S: Unusually strong strike for a 1953S (which is one of the worst in the series). Pass and Stow is full and bold, which is really rare. Bell lines have some really unfortunate marks on them, so no FBL. Luster is below average for the date (early 50's San Fran Franklins generally have really good luster). Eye appeal is below average (I don't like the spot on the obverse left rim). Contact marks on shoulder, bell, and elsewhere, but fields are generally free of marks. If the luster was better, this might be a 65. As is, I'd call it 64+. 1950D: Even before I looked at the reverse, I knew this was a Denver mint. They usually have better strikes than others. Bell lines are full and bold - but there are too many marks on the lines for me to want to pay a FBL price for it. Luster is the creamy, smooth luster that D mints are known for. Eye appeal is solid - old silver patina. Contact marks hurt this one. There are a lot of marks in the obverse fields, and the bell is pretty beat up. Poor eagle has been sliced clean in half. Can't go any higher than 63 here. 1949D: Classic coin here. The dies were still fairly new, so its more difficult to find a 49D that *isn't* fully detailed than one that is! FBL for sure. Luster and eye appeal are reading as average - nothing special, but not bad. Long wispy marks in the obverse fields, a whole lot of little tickmarks, and a bit of chatter on the face. I would easily pay a 64FBL price, but I wouldn't be opposed to a 65FBL if the luster is better in hand.
Nice write up/review. I could do this with one coin per post but just too many in one shot. Speaking of which its five o'clock somewhere! To the OP - Overall not bad Franklins, at the right price I would not mind having these coins in a set. Best!
Thanks for all the input. I cleaned up the photos so there was just one obverse and one reverse of each. There are another 30 or so in the collection so I’ll pull some better ones and see what you all think.
Very nice coins, Mark, but we're not 5-second graders like the TPGs. One at a time, paisan. Gazie mille.
Nice Bugs Bunny on the 1955 but not that high of a grade. I saw one marked as a MS-67 and it’s not even close. Too many for one post. I only have my cell phone so it’s on over load scrolling to look and comment on each coin.
Hey there @physics-fan3.14 here’s a better shot of the ‘49D from above. Plenty of luster on this one. I have a few more nice ones that I’ll post I. A fresh thread. Thanks again for the detailed input.
I am thinking whoever put MS67 on these puppies did not understand appeal or strike factors. Clearly they all seem to be MS, but I would not put anything higher than a 65 and that might be pushing it. I think @physics-fan3.14 did a great write-up.
Although the coin has descent luster. It is not enough to put it in the gem or premium Gem category. The gash or staple scratch keeps it from FBL
I got about 80 Franklins about 3 years ago. I put them in a slaw and labelled the slab with no grade. I put them in a box for coins when I got them. I have about 5 that I would think they are MS-62 at best. I don't have the means to make pictures. Maybe next year. I did splurge on the Franklin-Kennedy book. It, too, has been read yet. As you can tell, my wife is still with me for "Honey Do's".
Yes, one coin per post would make it easier. I have the 49D at MS-63 FBL. There are too many ticks for this to be gem. I see most of the lot as 63s. 64s & 65s can't have that many marks. Don't get me wrong, these are very nice Franklins!
