Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 1069041, member: 15309&quot;]I have never understood the fascination with the small &quot;S&quot; mintmark on this date.&nbsp; The small &quot;S&quot; is the standard mintmark used for the entire series.&nbsp; For whatever reason, a different (larger) punch was used on the SLQ in 1928.&nbsp; NGC does attribute both the small and large &quot;S&quot; varieties and they describe the large &quot;S&quot; as the result of use of a leftover punch from the 19th century.&nbsp; I know that the small &quot;S&quot; is more rare, but I would rather have the large &quot;S&quot; since it is a variation from the other &quot;S&quot; mint coins of the series.</p><p><br /></p><p>From Cline:</p><p><br /></p><p><i>The small mintmark is further to the right and down toward the date and does not touch the star.&nbsp; It is more rare than the large mintmark and has probably gone unnoticed by most collectors until about 10 years ago.&nbsp; This variety was added to the Guidebook in 1976.&nbsp; Some varieties have the mintmark setting below the point of the star.&nbsp; There seem to be only one or two dies of the small mintmark of this date.</i></p><p><br /></p><p>I searched the Heritage archives and pulled some photos to show the difference between the two mintmarks with the large &quot;S&quot; on the left and small &quot;S&quot; on the right.&nbsp; Note how the small &quot;S&quot; sets below the point of the star.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o59/ACPitBoss/Standing%20Liberty%20Quarters/SLQ1928-SMintmarkCompare.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>From your photos, it looks like you have a small &quot;S&quot; variety.&nbsp; Having said that, I don&#039;t believe that there would be any premium for this variety in this condition.[/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