Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;phankins11, post: 2207917, member: 70703&quot;]Your pics aren&#039;t as clear as I&#039;d like them to be but it appears to be either a highly polished standard business strike Washington or quite possibly a highly polished 1964 silver Washington Quarter with the type C reverse</p><p><br /></p><p>Can you get better pics of the reverse....here&#039;s why...</p><p><br /></p><p>There are three pick up points for a proof reverse of the Washington Quarter</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]430962[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>On the proof there is a VERY clear separation between the E and S of STATES</p><p>The leaf tip to the left of the arrow tips ends above the upper arrow&#039;s tip</p><p>and the leaf tip above the A in DOLLAR actually touches the A</p><p><br /></p><p>Overall the reverse strike on your coin is very sharp, that&#039;s what&#039;s odd about this coin. If its not a proof reverse it is certainly struck well. This means one more possibility, tho and that is a 1964 REVERSE C A.K.A the reverse of 1965. The C reverse was a sharpening of the original business strike design which was done in prep for the transition to the clad coinage the following year. There are known examples of 1964 Silver quarters with the Type C Reverse. IF that&#039;s what that is it is definitely worth more.</p><p><br /></p><p>What&#039;s leading me to believe the reverse if 1965 theory here is that the leave above the A in DOLLAR does seem to be touching the A, the ES in STATES looks to have that distinct separation but the leaf tip to the left of the arrow tips is not ending above the top arrow tip.</p><p><br /></p><p>However the highly polished look has me worried that it was just a well struck business strike quarter that someone polished and tried to pass of as a proof.[/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