Dateless type 1 SLQ(possible 1916)

Headshot

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Right arm

 

Shield

 

2nd type 1 ankle

 

Headshot

 

Arm

 

2nd Arm

 

Shield

 

All 3 of those are 1917 type 1s. The shield rivet detail gives it away, as well as the drapery creases.

 

i agree with johny. first thing i noticed was the shield and didn't really need to look any further.

even though they are not the real expensive '16, the '17 type 1 is a real cool coin. just the story on it, makes it one of my favorites!

and they are still worth more then melt. recently i have seen raw 1917-S type 1, go for around $20 in G condition.

 

I don't notice the differences in the creases that y'all talk about can you explain the difference?

 

^^

on the 1916, the rivets on the shield are very very weak, pretty much not even there, even on higher grade examples. on the 1917 the rivets were struck better and much more noticeable, just like yours.

 

Go back and study the 2 examples that I posted with the red diagrams. It discusses all of the major diagnostic differences in detail with pictures of a 1916 and 1917 in the same grade.

 

I see 4 diagnostics (Hair, Robe fold, Shield Rivets and separation from the floor) which point to 1916 and 1 (wall definition) which points to 1917 with one indistinguishable (Beeds). As usual, not all diagnostics are necessarily consistent.

 

The reverses also help to identify 1917 type 1 & 2.

 

Well looks like I got 2 type 1 1917 slq and 1 type 1 1917 s slq.

The thrill of the hunt!

Thanks everyone.

 

Treasurhunt, I made no comment about whether are not it was a 1916, just that a dateless 1916 DOES have significant value

 

I did post it over there as an add-on to the thread that I originally started in regards to my first dateless 1916 find. So far it seems that the consensus is that it is likely a dateless 1916:
​

http://forums.collectors.com/messag...adid=768314&highlight_key=y&keyword1=dateless

Condor: You are absolutely right about a dateless 16 having value. Here is an ANACS PR01 that sold for $1,500 on Heritage:
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=360&Lot_No=6558
and a FR02 that also sold for $1,500:
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=1947

In general, a dateless 16 is going to go for 4 figures or nearly so in almost any condition.

 

Thank you for that analysis Marshal! That is exactly the type of response I was looking for. Personally, I think the wall definition is closer to that of a 1916, but it could just be a case of me wanting everything to fit...lol. Isn't it true that ownership instantly makes your coin more rare and valuable??? ;-) It's a tough call because I'm asking folks to make a determination with limited information, so this was meant to be a bit of a challenge.

On the 1917, there is a very thin incuse line shaping those squares, and it is very defined even in low grades where as the 1916 square detail is much more subtle.

Here is the lot that the picture came from...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250672816696&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT

​