1963 franklin is it proof ,mat or FBL60+ ??

Discussion in 'What's it Worth' started by Snake Eyes, Mar 28, 2009.

  1. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Member

    :goofer:I will try and post the picture tomorrow , I have a 1963 franklin half dollar so shiny I can see myself in the mirror finish but franklin himself is a semi frost but on the reverse it has full bell lines FBL and the bell is semi frosted also.

    So is it a proof finish - there is listing for one in my book but not frosted
    or is it a matt finish - no listings in my book for mat finish ( satin )
    and or with FBL on reverse do I file it as FBL 66 ( I wish ):confused:
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Member

    P.S. I forgot to mention it is a plain not a D mint
     
  4. Hobo

    Hobo Squirrel Hater

    It is not a matte finish Proof. Only Brilliant Proofs were made then. Yours sounds like a Cameo (mirror fields and frosted devices).

    FBL does not apply to Proof coins because they are struck at least twice under higher pressure which brings up all (or at least most) of the details. Business Strike coins are struck once and some details may not strike up (so a Business Strike Franklin with FBLs would be a superior coin compared to other Business Strikes).
     
  5. Hobo

    Hobo Squirrel Hater

    If it is Proof it could not be a 'D' because Proof coins were only struck at the Philly Mint then.

    Do you have a copy of the Red Book? If not you should get a copy and read it. There are good chapters on how coins are made and how Proof coins are made. You can learn a LOT from the Red Book. (Just don't depend on it for coin values.)
     
  6. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Member

    Thanks for the info , I was looking in the red book also my electronic cataloging book and this info was not in it along with types of franklin strikes but it makes sense as to what it is thanks again
     
  7. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Member

    also the coin is NOT a D it is a plain (no mint mark)
     
  8. CamaroDMD

    CamaroDMD [Insert Clever Title]

    I could be a proof because proofs minted in 1963 where minted at the Philadelphia mint. We would need a picture to know for sure. Now, if it is a proof it can't be considered a "FBL" coin because proofs aren't given that designation. The strike quality of a proof is expected to create FBLs so it isn't mentioned.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page