Can anyone look at this for me? It has reflective surfaces like a proof and the edges look polished. the rims are not as squared as I would have expected, so I am unsure of proof or circulation strike. @physics-fan3.14 @Insider @GDJMSP
I'll say Proof . Proof what ? Out of my expertise . Nicest IH I ever saw ( here anyways ) ! This a business strike :
The image looks like a Proof and the carbon spots add to that look. Go on the internet and look up Proofs of this date at Heritage. Blow up their image and see if the die polish matches.
Can you show us a picture of the rims? There are several things pushing me towards Business Strike for this one: 1. mushy dentils 2. mushy date 3. mushy shield I would expect these details to be sharp and crisp on a proof. I just compared about 20 proofs on Heritage to your coin, and your coin is definitely weaker in all of those areas compared to the proofs. Additionally, I couldn't find any that exhibited die polish (at least, it wasn't evident in the pictures). The large amounts of apparent die polish on the reverse tend to push me in the direction of "proof die which was then put into service for business strikes." This was fairly common in the late 19th century. The seemingly lustrous nature of the reverse, as opposed to the mirrored finish I expect on a proof, also lends itself to this theory. If there are any unique die markers of a proof, @messydesk will know them. At this point, I don't think its a proof. More pictures or more evidence could change my mind.
There are 4 proof dies. Your coin does not match the DDR var. One obverse has a repunched 8 & 5. Many of these Proofs are found weakly struck. One proof reverse die has the right shield point connected to the denticals (as yours). Check for a RPD. Unfortunately, your image is not sharp enough or of high magnification.
Thank you all for the help. I tend to think business strike as well. The rims are not sharp, but more rounded like a business strike which is what I based my opinions on. someone of fairly good experience said proof at first. I wanted an opinion. The spots/junk on the coin is killing me, as it likely keeps this coin from a really good grade, and that said, isn’t it worth more as a business strike?
The spots should be conserved before they do damage to the coin. Assuming that, once the spots are removed, this would grade 64 RD, a proof (no cameo) lists for high $600s, a business strike lists for low $700s on the NGC price guide. This trend is generally true for most grades - the business strike is listed for marginally higher than the proof.
I’m leaning toward business strike myself. I first thought proof but was skeptic the rims I compared some pics and am leaning towards business strike by the details I saw it’s just not crisp enough in the fine details and the denticles
The rims, (particularly the obv), the surfaces of the fields, and the type of luster the coin appears to have say business strike to me. As for the spots Mike, some of them at least look to have small pieces debris in their centers which is somewhat typical of spots like these. At some point tiny pieces of organic debris get deposited on the coin and as the debris decays it causes that dark toning. Spots with this cause, well sometimes they can be removed to one degree or another, whereas true carbon spots, (and a couple look like they might be), unh uh, those are typically there to stay. But even when the dark spots do have an organic cause and are removed, most of the time a light spot replaces the dark spot. I guess what I'm trying to say is - I think I'd leave them alone if it were me.
I would say yes! It looks to be in really great shape with the exception of the carbon spots. I would grade it as a PF68 due to the carbon spots.
Not really. "Chamfered" would imply that the edge is intentionally bevelled. Some coins do have intentionally bevelled edges, but most do not. On a proof coin, the actual creation of the planchet is done differently - the edge is intentionally squared. On a business strike, the coins are rolled in the cleaning chamber, they are rolled in the edge upsetting mill, and they are basically treated like generic metal rounds. When the planchet was punched, it would have had square rims - but all of this treatment blunts the edges. So, calling the rims "rounded" is also somewhat of a fallacy (they aren't intentionally rounded) - but they also aren't intentionally squared like the proofs.
