So I've always loved the classic designs of the 1900-1940's. And looking at the proofs from that time period I have noticed major price differences with coins. Lets say I want a proof Merc, I can get a nice one for around $100. But if I wanted a proof buffalo nickel they are much more expensive! Same with the Walking Liberty's! Why is that? Were the mintages that different? I looked and saw that not to many buffalo's were made. But there seemed to be more Walking Liberty's than merc's.
If you just want one of the type, just stay away from 1936 and you should find some pretty reasonably priced coins. Buffaloes can get steep in a hurry in higher grades though. Here's a few to wet your whistle.
I've always wanted to do a set of all of the 20th century matte proofs, but it is prohibitively expensive to say the least. Maybe I'll complete the Lincoln's one day.
Buffaloes were only made in 36 and 37 and both are relatively low mintage. Mercury dimes are available for 36 - 42 with the later years being much more available. The Walkers also come 36 - 42 but they have lower mintages. Back then collectors could order individual coins and more small denominations were ordered than large ones. So if someone just wants a proof of any date, the Mercury is the easiest, then the Walkers (because of the multiple years) and finally the buffaloes.
There were also 1913 type 1 and 2, 1914, 1915, 1916 and 1936 satin finish buffalo nickel proofs. Wish I had one to show you...
True but the early matte proof buffaloes are a lot more expensive so I only concentrated on the 36 to 42 era because he was wondering why the Merc could be had for $100 while the others were higher. There are 1916 proof Mercs and Walkers too I believe but they are a LOT tougher.
As for the 1916 Mercury Dime Proof, only one is known to actually exist. From David W. Lange's 2005 Book: The Complete Guide to Mercury Dimes MINTAGE: (unknown) RARITY: The late Walter Breen wrote that as many as five proofs having a satin or slightly matte finish were in existence. Little or no documentation was offered for this claim, and the whereabouts of only a single specimen is presently known. This is the coin illustrated above, found within the National Numismatic Collection of the Smithsonian Institution’s Museum of American History. While a portion of this collection was displayed for generations before being put into storage in 2004, it is believed that this lone 1916 proof was never publicly displayed. Its existence is thus little known to the hobby. To see the photo, partial wire rims and full strike of the high relief coin, you can see it here. https://www.davidlawrence.com/books...o-mercury-dimes/chapter-7/proof-coinage/1916/ There are 1916 Patterns and they can be read about here: https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-2/pattern-coins/
As Larry said, I totally agree. There are lots of them out there, some are just a bit pricy. Be picky and go for eye appeal!
Though the 1916 is generally regarded as a proof striking, it is generally known that Breen was a bit liberal in his classification of proof strikes. Two coins from my own collection were once called proofs by Breen and a few of his contemporaries, but are now considered business strikes. This type 1 standing liberty quarter has been a contraversial piece for decades, Breen considered it a proof strike, but John Albanese and Cline himself inspected this coin in hand and could not conclusively name the method of manufactur either way. (Though hearing them debate the issue was a great education for me.) Today it stands as a nice business strike SLQ and is the plate coin for SLQ.org, but what the mints intention was is still unclear. This large cent from the Naftzger/ Dan Holmes collection was called a proof striking by Breen and Grellman, but PCGS and NGC now disagree with their opinions. Though proof strikes of the N-1 die marriage are known, the debate continues about this coin. I consider it just a nice business strike, but it was clearly struck with some extra care. Perhaps the intention initially was to make it a proof coin, but the planchet flaw designated the coin as only a single struck business strike. The coin displays full mirrors and very sharp edges.
And then there are some special expensive coins that have been granted the label of SP by certain TPGs in recent years. I wonder if some of the situations you alluded to, along with some spirited discussion and money on the line, has lead to different classifications for certain coins. If you have the ear of the right people and those coins you posted are yours then maybe you can get them classified as Special?
The two coins that I showed have a long pedigree and are known within grading and auction circles, having them reclassified now would be a long shot to say the least. Though getting the SLQ designated a a proof strike would make it unique and a mid six figure coin.
