Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 8635743, member: 19165&quot;]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&#039;re looking at, and then post another couple the next day. That strings out the fun for us, and you&#039;ll get better responses. </p><p><br /></p><p>Anyways, I think we can all agree that &quot;67&quot; is fanciful. Here&#039;s my analysis using my SLEC method (strike, luster, eye appeal, contact marks):</p><p><br /></p><p>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. </p><p><br /></p><p>1953D: Average strike. Would be FBL, except for mark at far right (although I&#039;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&#039;d call it 63. </p><p><br /></p><p>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&#039;s San Fran Franklins generally have really good luster). Eye appeal is below average (I don&#039;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&#039;d call it 64+.</p><p><br /></p><p>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&#039;t go any higher than 63 here. </p><p><br /></p><p>1949D: Classic coin here. The dies were still fairly new, so its more difficult to find a 49D that *isn&#039;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&#039;t be opposed to a 65FBL if the luster is better in hand.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in