Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;cladking, post: 286809, member: 68&quot;]This is a pretty complicated subject because the mint didn&#039;t make all the set coins nor the regular issues in the same way or to the same standards.&nbsp; As a general rule the mint set coins were struck with a much higher coining force and a slower speeds than the regular issues but otherwise there isn&#039;t much you can say that applies across the board.&nbsp; Some of the SMS dies were basined (fields ground flat) and the high areas sandblasted like proof coins but when these dies were retired from service they were then used to strike regular circulation coins without a mint mark in San Francisco.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Some planchets were polished and these may have all been used for SMS production but the number was small.&nbsp; The mint experimented quite a bit with these and most, if not all, the dies went on to strike regular coinage.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Quality of the SMS coinage ranges from poor even by mint state standards to essentially proof.&nbsp; While the SMS coins were struck once they were struck at more pressure than proofs are struck, a very few appear to have been struck twice.&nbsp; &nbsp; The proofs are struck twice.&nbsp; Quality of regular issues in those years ranged from simply horrid to at least choice gem but high grade coins are quite difficult.&nbsp; These coins were usually struck by highly eroded dies spaced far apart and unevenly.&nbsp; The planchets were bad and the struck coins were mangled.&nbsp; Generally if you assume gems are SMS you&#039;ll be right 98% of the time. With a little more refinement you can probably get a lot closer but, as has been said, you can&#039;t really know.[/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