1917 proof Lincoln??

IF you had the only 1917 matte proof known to exist it would be worth what someone is willing to pay for it. You can't put a price on something that has never sold and probably doesn't exist. How much would a live unicorn go for? A dollar, 10, a million?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So show me one that has been authenticated!

Oh, I will save you the trouble. NONE have ever been certified. Now if someone had one he suspected as real, they would necessarily try to get it certified. But NONE have been certified.

 

Well it would be the rarest Lincoln penny. Funny because I asked a dealer I know who is in his seventies and has been a coin dealer since the 1960s and he said it does exist. But what would he know he's only been collecting 65 years.

 

Saying a coin exists and have proof it exists are two different things.

 

You can fight the fight all you want, but until there are US Mint documents showing one or more were struck or until a reputable firm steps up to the plate and authenticates a piece then all we have to go on is a choice between none having been minted or folks who write something on the internet that is as much hope as anything else. As for the Red Book, a representative of Whitman Publishing has already written on the PCGS boards that the listing for the 1917 proof Lincoln cent is or will be removed from the next issue because there is no evidence that it ever existed.

If you are confident your coin is a proof then it seems like a no-brainer decision to send it into PCGS or NGC for certification. Either company would be delighted to authenticate and confirm the existence of this coin and they would have a field day with the publicity. Regardless of if the coin were to go into a Genuine holder, a details only holder or a problem-free holder; you would be sitting on a minimum six-figure lottery winner. Send it in.

 

a. - As long as I have been collecting. So?
b. - read what Tom B says.

 

I would still like to see the edge of the coin at an angle please.

 

While the Red Book is a useful tool, I do not hold it sacred since there are errors in my area of expertise of Large Cents. I therefore assume such errors in other areas where I am not expert. It broadens narrow categories and groups differing categories into a single one creating further confusion. It is what it is... a brief summary of a large amount of information in a portable form and not a detailed account which would fill a library.

At the same time, TPGs are what they are. An opinion of experts looking at 6 coins a minute. It is not suitable as a substitute for numismatic study.

 

I'm looking at the image in post #61 of this thread. Look at the top rim of the coin. The die that struck this coin was misaligned. I have never seen that on a matte proof. Not saying that's not possible but I have never seen it. Better images of both sides and the edge at an angle would go a long way. I don't have a guess of what a real 1917 matte proof would bring.

 

Very unlikely that my 1917 is a matte proof like I said maybe a 1% chance. But I am getting it graded by NGC on Friday in Baltimore. Odds are it's a regular strike 1917. But I have never seen a penny with that much detail before and I have seen thousands of them uncirculated in my life.

 

The details on that date are exactly why I like that date. They are noted for both good strikes and great detail. Look at these;
Post your Lincolns!
Post your Lincolns!

 

I just looked at those Lincoln's you posted beautiful coins but still my coin has more detail similar to the matte proofs.

 

That doesn't come across in your photos. The same may be the case with the other photos posted. Ownership seems to add considerable admiration along with visions of impossible dreams.

There have been a multitude of owners who swear they have the MPL version of Lincoln's from 1909-16. Those odds are way less than 1% and those from years where MPL's are known to exist. To find an MPL from any year other than 1909-16 your odds are more like .0000001%.

 

We will see on Friday I have the coin I compared it to all the 1917 on here even the PCGS ms64 and my coin has more detail without a doubt. Like I said it may be a long shot but it still has more detail. I used a cell phone camera with no zoom so you can't tell from my picture anyway. But if you don't think they exist no matter what I say your not gonna except it as real.

 

I wish you luck Mike.
All I can say is: I recently learned that some business strikes for the early wheats will certainly make a person think it's a proof.
Some of you may remember this from 6 months ago. I swore up and down it was a proof due to the stunning detail and the edge looking somewhat more square than a normal business strike. Of course, I was wrong...

 

See those pictures of the edge the edges look rounded mine appear to be straight with a 90 degree angle.

 

This is interesting to me. When I was looking at examples of graded 1916 matte proofs, I did see one with slightly misaligned dies on both sides.

PCGS Graded matte proof with misaligned dies. Unless of course it was a cropping issue...

 

I hope you are right Mike. Please understand that the folks on the forums have seen this same issue play out a hundred times. It would be really cool for someone to actually find one.

 

I am second guessing now I looked at the edges of the coin and they look slightly rounded. I am still having it graded but after looking at the edges over and over it looks less rounded then a regular penny but there is a rounded. If they are rounded that would make it not a matte proof right? I just still can't explain the detail on the obverse best I have ever seen besides a slabbed matte proof.

 

Does anyone have a picture of the edge of an authentic matte proof?