Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;19Lyds, post: 2783882, member: 15929&quot;](Not my Auction)</p><p>I don&#039;t know about the rest of you but I have a standing search for Eisenhower Error Coins and an interesting one popped up this morning.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/253018347342?ul_noapp=true" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/253018347342?ul_noapp=true" rel="nofollow">http://www.ebay.com/itm/253018347342?ul_noapp=true</a></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]644766[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]644765[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>This is labeled as Double Struck on a 2g aluminum planchet which, in all likelihood, is correct.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, in the body of the text, the seller, sullivannumismatics, which I assume is Jon Sullivan of CONECA, states:</p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;Also, we believe the coin is a 1971, although enough of the last digit of the date is missing that it&#039;s hard to be 100% certain.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>If folks look at the pictures of the coin, it is obvious that this is NOT a 1971-S but in all likelihood a 1974-S.</p><p><br /></p><p>Why?</p><p><br /></p><p>Simple. </p><p><br /></p><p>That reverse design did not appear until 1973!</p><p><br /></p><p>Obviously, that last digit is not a 3 which brings up the possibility that it could be either a 4, a 7, or an 8. (Remember, 1975 &amp; 1976 were BiCentennial Years of different designs)</p><p><br /></p><p>Is it a 3? I would expect to see some semblance of rounding on that last digit if it were either a 3 or an 8. That just does not exist.</p><p><br /></p><p>Could it be a 7? I would expect that the last digit would be much broader, wider, if it were the top of a 7.</p><p><br /></p><p>This only leaves the 4 and that last digit, IMO, is the very top of a 4!</p><p><br /></p><p>The actual &quot;tells&quot; are the top of the 9 and the top of the 7 in the 2nd and 3rd digits of the date.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thoughts?</p><p><br /></p><p>Almost forgot, with absolutely no intention of disparaging or even attempting to disparage Sullivan Numismatics, I find it incredibly odd that this particular coin would even make it out of the San Francisco Facility.</p><p><br /></p><p>Presumable, the coins, once struck, were loaded into Proof Set Lenses for distribution to the public. This coins was much smaller and obviously would not have been included in a proof set. Even if the coins were mechanically loaded, it&#039;s weight would have been an issue since the loader would have been expecting a 24.6 gram coin!</p><p><br /></p><p>Soooo, how did it get out? Was it one of the &quot;oil pan&quot; coins? Was it intentionally manufactured after hours by an employee who knew it could be sold for well over proof coin value?</p><p><br /></p><p>Ahh, to have been a fly on the wall in the San Francisco Mint during the 70&#039;s![/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