Is this pattern Error on 1918-D Standing Liberty Quarter?

Hi . I posted this coin a few weeks ago. But when I zoomed in and took a closer look I noticed something that doesn't look right. Is it? Pattern near the rim below IN GOD that looks protruding. Sequence doesn't seem right. Please have a look. I'm new to this. Thanks guys.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Here's another for comparison
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1118&Lot_No=1310#photo
rzage

 

Thank you for your help rzage. I compared the two. But I'm sad to say I still do not know if it's an error. Have you checked on the smaller photo above? The pattern should be like oiioiio not oiioiiio with an extra i. Can't really describe it.

 

http://www.mrbrklyn.com/coins/may_25_2007/standing_liberty_quarter_1917_typeI_obverse_1.jpg

http://www.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11072008/slq_1925_obv_vf.2.png

it might be damage. I agree that it looks strange and I can't explain it.

Ruben

 

here is another

http://www.mrbrklyn.com/coins/11172008/slq1930_o_9.png

 

Hi Ruben. You have great looking quarters. I previously viewed a link to your photos you posted earlier.

Yah really strange. I kept on looking at it thinking of an explanation.

 

that is a GREAT MS64....

Ruben

 

Yes it it well struck , now all it needs is a CAC sticker LOL
rzage

 

I can't think of an explanation either , where are all the error experts when you need them . It does seem to have an extra digit .
rzage

 

I was thinking that and I was afrain to say that I don't think that it should be just a 64..but I don't want an avalanche of CAC proponents pointing it out.

It might be that the 1918 was well struck in the general. I don't know. But if a Morgan was that clean it would get 68 grades.

Ruben

 

I'm posting them because the beads are clear, at least on the last 2 examples and they are exactly the same in that quadrant. So, assuming for the moment that the coin is not a counterfeit, there is definitely either damage or a die variation. What is strange is that it seems that there is not much wear on that point of the coin. Was it hit or was a bead sliced some how?

Ruben

 

Ruben,

That appears to be a serious post. I find it hard to believe that you like that coin. In the toning world, that coin would be described as "wholly original." It is kinda like saying a girl has a nice personality. This is the type of coin that will usually only appeal to the most die hard toning enthusiasts. The peripheral toning is deep, dark, and bordering on the danger zone.

With regards to the assigned grade, the coin looks to be very clean for an MS64 and the strike is well defined, especially in the head. However, the luster on this coin seems to be severely subdued by the deep toning. Without luster, the eye appeal will certainly suffer even though she has a nice personality. I personally would grade this coin and MS65FH, but I have not seen the coin in hand and we must remember that market grading includes all four factors (surface preservation, strike, luster, & eye appeal). Sometimes the combination of these elements of grading results in a higher grade than the technical grade, and sometimes it is lower. This coin would be the latter.

We should keep and eye on this coin. Three of the last 5 at this grade sold for less than Numismedia Wholesale. My guess is that the full head on this girl will get her between wholesale and retail.

 

Are we talking about the same coin? Here is the image

 

Yes, gunmetal blue and violet peripheries with green highlights and grey toned centers. Wholly original. Those colors are at the end of the spectrum and not something I would expect you to like given your previous posts related to toning. The next color after dark blue and violet on a coin is: BLACK.

Don't get me wrong. I like the coin, I am a toning freak. I just didn't expect you to like this coin and never in a million years would I have thought you would call it great.

I am very interested to know why you like it though if you want to tell me.

Paul

 

the upper part of the coin is excellent strike but the lines that go across the stone boxes are not visible. A don't see that as so dark.

maybe this

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1118&Lot_No=7711#Photo
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1118&Lot_No=1334#Photo

I've seen these so tarnished that you could barely see their detail.

Ruben

 

want to see a bad CAC sticker?

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1118&Lot_No=1337#Photo

 

Well I don't like the dappled chestnut coloration but the coral undertones are extremely attractive and it appears to be extremely lustrous. The strike is probably not as bad as those photos are making it appear and the surfaces are outstanding.

All in all, I think it is properly graded as an MS66, but certainly not a coin that I would buy.

 

Paul

I don't see it as that toned. Most of it is light, at least from the photo, regardless of the toning being dark where it is dark. These coins seem to always ton dark. I haven't seen any rainbow SLQ's although I'm sure there are.

You miss understand how I feel about toning. In general, I don't care. I like to see some because it shows that the coin is original and not dipped, and its a bit handsome sometimes like grey hair but if I have to fight the toning to see the coin, forget it. Or if the toning distracts from the coin, forget it.

It is your campaign for toning that drives me crazy

Ruben

 

LOL, that was funny. I am sorry to say however, the campaign must go on.




PS. You gotta like that one, it really is a superb coin.

 

Will you forget the toning colors for a minute. I don't see that coin as a Fh let alone a 66 strike. The shield detail sucks. Her Pelvic and Stomach areas are nondescript (I can say Pelvic with regard to Standing Liberty on cointalk? right?). On the reverse the feathers are all blurred together. IMO this isn't a 66 or a 65. Its an ugly 64 maybe.

Ruben