1970 s small date. or im dumb.

Wait for Rick. I see small all day

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm standing behind you

 

Large.

 

Love you kurt but i hope your wrong. But you are my main man still

 

Tell kurt he's wrong. Go ahead do it

 

How do you call up rick. Someone needs to. Sorry stud

 

Cute. Very cute. Thanks

 

That you do. Love your witt

 

Damn kurt. This guy knows his stuff. Wish he never showed up

 

The idea that any one person's opinion is somehow more important or enlightening than what the coin itself tells us is pure folly.

Might as well just flip a coin...

 

That was awesome! You all are amazing. Thank you.

 

My bad

 

It's another case where I believe there are NOT only two types. There are lots of coins where the 7 is not low, but it's still called a LD because of the 9's pointing. There are at least three types out there.

 

I have to agree with you spirityoda. The height of the 7 and 0 and the position of the s mint mark. Small date! Although the 9 throws me back to large

 

No. It's not even close.
His own photo in post #2 shows this coin to be large date.
The 9 is pointing down and not across.

 

Some people INSIST on looking at the relative height of the 7 compared to the 9 and 0. EVER TRYING TO USE THAT WAS ALWAYS A MISTAKE! It never should have been used as a diagnostic. It's a false indication. That's why I say there are 3 types, not 2.

Look, I have the same books everyone else does. The books are WRONG about the 7. ONLY the 9 matters.

I own at least 20 Mint State 1970-S cents on which the tops of the 9, 7, and 0 are dead flat even, but NONE of them are SD. I also have about 3 or 4 1970-S solid BU rolls that I've never opened.

 

The 3 key markers on the buisiness strike 1970-S small date are:
The curl of the 9 pointing across/ parallel.
The point of the 9 being sharp and
LIBERTY is weakly struck.
Almost all of these coins are Large dates. The 9 points down,
the bottom of the 9 is blunt, LIBERTY is well struck.
The position of the 7 is so subtle it is not a good indication as a marker
for this variety.
If you look at the curl of the 9 in the OP, it is 100% LD.

 

Mikey knows.

 

Could there be a possible repeat of the '60 small/large? Or in this case large/small?

 

I think we need a more focused close up pic of the date to be sure