GTG 1867 dime

I am not going with proof because from the little I read, proof dies for this were usually better and generally did not show clashing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'll phone you. Money wise, AU makes better sense.

 

Look up a variety 102 seated dime and re read my post

 

so my instincts are better than I thought...

 

Well the cat is partially out of the bag...Paddy is correct that the coin which I posted is indeed an F-102 business strike dime. The most obvious indicators are the obverse clash as well as the position of the date, both of which are specific to business strikes for the year. For reference:

http://www.seateddimevarieties.com/date_mintmark/1867_102page.htm

 

i'm going to say what Paddy was getting at that it is graded a PR63....but I don't think it should be.

 

Correct! Which brings forward the real question...



What would everyone do? The coin is in an older transitional PCGS holder circa 2005. The holder is in excellent shape which allows for easy viewing and likely helped the seller get such lovely photographs.....but the coin is most certainly a business strike.

Would PCGS simply correct the error as perhaps a mechanical error if asked? Would the forum be inclined to crack out and submit raw for a new, fresh opinion? Would most informed people not really care and leave as is for simplicity? My collection of seated dimes is in primarily circulated grades so this coin doesn't "fit" so well with the rest, but I couldn't pass up a business strike at proof pricing...

 

I should add that the lovely original surfaces and clean fields (other than some die polish lines and the mentioned clashing) don't leave the coin looking remotely prooflike. What PCGS was thinking back in 2005 is beyond me....

 

I don't have any experience in cracking out to grade at PCGS or asking for a reholster to put correct info.

 

So it would be a good bet if a series has huge dips in mintages ie.1 [ nickel 3 cent pcs, half dimes, dimes,etc.] That one may have a proof coin? Or a MS coin struck using retired Proof dies? Wasn't that just a thread a few weeks back?1

So this type of knowledge might be helpful at some point.....

 

As an 1867 10C business strike is much more valuable than the proof coin, I’d send it to NGC as a crossover, stating it should be a mint state coin. If they agree, you made some money. If they don’t, the coin should stay in its holder.

 

Granted the MS coins in these cases for the most part are always worth more.
The problem is that can you be 100 % sure? Like lets say an 1883 lll (6609) proofs (4000) MS coins minted.
So lets say I need an 1883 lll in MS how can I " Paddy " be quite sure the sweet 1883 business strike that is in the mid 60`s grade wise be legitimate?

 

@micbraun
@Kasia

Answers?

Now remember a 65 in MS is around $9750. In proof $500 for an 1883 nickel 3 cent pc.

 

Let me ask this, Paddy. Do you agree with me on the rub?

 

No

 

I do agree with Kasia......who pm me and said....." one of the reference sites said there was no proof coins struck on a 102 die marriage.

Correct..... so I will bet on the bay.....$20 on the nose this coin in fact is an MS strike not a proof strike.

 

Paddy, IDK. The crackout game is something I have not played. But if enough info is available to pretty much conclusively say a coin is MS vs PR because of known facts, then going for a different grade should be fine.

I could see this being what it was if there was either a mechanical error or the grader of this coin did not know the series and thought the dies used were proof dies. But what bothers me more is why the submitter accepted the grade and did not challenge it. Unless the submitter did not know either. Or if it was challenged and PCGS continued to say it was PR. I don't know what happened.

 

Oh personally I wouldn't crack it out..... I leave it as is.....and note my assumptions

 

Well in this case, the "experts" (Greer and Fortin) both state that only business strikes come from this die pair. I assume PCGS and/or NGC would go with the best available data if challenged. As far as other series, I suppose it would matter how much research has been done into die pairs, etc.

As previously stated, often proof dies were retired only to be reused for business strikes. A nice example I have is an AU55(star) 3cs. I have not found a reference to assist me in coming to a definate conclusion that the coin is a business strike and not a proof, but the strike and rims seem to imply that it is. I hope this is the case as the last couple auction records in AU are well above guide prices...