Mercury Dimes and Bands

Hello All, Haven't seen many Mercury dimes on recently. Was going through some of mine and decided to post a couple and ask question as to Full bands designation. They all are a little toned.

First, here is a 1936 with no doubts is NOT a full bands dimes, but pretty in my opinion.




Now here is a 1937 dime and I show the center band separately, Is this a full center band or not?





And here is a 1937D , again same question,





Thanks
Jim

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Mercs are not my area but in my opinion:

1937 - No. The line between the bands has a gap or two.

1937-D - No. There is a large gap in the line between the bands.

One must be careful with these because - this may come as a shock to some - people have been known to complete or enhance the line between the bands using something like an Xacto knife.

 

OK Here we go

I love mercs and picked a nice one up yesterday

The first one, obviously no center bands, but you don't need my opinion for that.


The '37 in the middle, the center band is not likely, but might be. It really doesn't matter because the top band is definitely not split

the '37 on the bottom is a no, not the middle or the top.

Ruben

 

Here is a quick look of what I got this weekend without the tripod.





I bet this is an MS66 FB

.......

 

A very good point is contained in this response that is often overlooked.
Everyone concentrates on the middle bands BUT to be "full bands" ALL three sets of bands must be split.

 

Nice Mercury DG!!!!

 

In order to have full bands I think that all bands must be complete and unbroken, as of course these coins will command higher premiums than other coins that only meet a TPGs standard.

 

Thanks to all!

Ruben, your photo brings questions to part of mine. What magnification is necessary to designate Full band? As some gaps may be visible under 20X that aren't at 5X or 10X?

I am not sure what magnification the TPG companies use for various size coins.

I feel the thought is that the band must show a absolutely complete groove with no interruption or ding on the groove.

Thanks Doug, I had read that thread and was part of my interest to teach myself to evaluate split bands. I have a roll I will go through to see if I can make myself more accurate. Photos in many guides are not well presented, and as you mention, different TPGs do use different criteria.

Thanks for taking the time to help me learn,:high5:

Jim

 

PCGS gave this one FB. Sorry it's so large. Merc. dimes are one of my favorite designs.

 

Now that's what a FB merc should look like . From the MS Mercs I've seen the top and bottom are usually always split , and I say usually , maybe that's why PCGS just states the middle band as that is usually the weakest , I'm sure they wouldn't give FB notation if one of the top or bottom bands wasn't split .
rzage:whistle:

 

I find it strange that PCGS doesn't have as high standards for FB designation. Maybe it's just me, but I thought most considered them #1. I guess it just depends?

 

Ok. Here is my latest 1940S: Reverse

 

Nice split bands definitely. :thumb:

 

Well, here's where you're wrong. Most consider SGS to be #1.

All joking aside, I was wondering the same thing.

Now that I look at my merc, and the others posted, it looks like the top and bottom bands could be more consistent with strike... I may be making a foolish assumption... but who knows. That is my guess.

 

Sharp Picture!

 

In theory I think it is 5x but don't ask me how they can make that designationa at that magnification becuase...there is no way...they are real small.

Ruben