SMS vs. MS coins and TPG submission.

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by rickmp, Jun 17, 2012.

  1. rickmp

    rickmp Frequently flatulent.

    In 1965, 1966 and 1967, the mint issued Special Mint Sets instead of Proof Sets.
    The price guides all list MS coins with much higher prices than SMS coins with corresponding dates and numerical grades. This makes me ask the hypothetical question, if the coins from these SMS were broken out of their original plastic holders (inadvertently or intentionally) and submitted a TPG as circulation coins, would they be graded as MS, or would the graders know that they were actually SMS coins and grade them as SMS?
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Merc Crazy

    Merc Crazy Bumbling numismatic fool

    The strike quality of the SMS coins is a lot better, so it shouldn't be too hard for a pro to differentiate.
  4. Zachkeaton

    Zachkeaton Cervus non Servus

    They could tell the difference. SMS coins are higher quality than business strikes, so it would be kind of like trying to pass off early proof coins as normal MS specimens.
  5. CamaroDMD

    CamaroDMD Supporter! Supporter

    Yes, they have higher quality strikes. Remember, these SMS coins were produced instead of proofs during those years. Even though they don't quite have the same qualities as a proof, they are similar in many ways and easy to distinguish from a normal business strike.

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    There have been more than a few cases where NGC and PCGS mistakenly attributed coins as SMS coins as MS, and MS coins as SMS.

    So no, even the pros cannot always tell them apart. About the only time you can tell them apart for certain is if the coins are cameo.
  7. TheCoinGeezer

    TheCoinGeezer Senex Bombulum

    In my experience the strikes got progressively better from 1965 thru 1967.
    That's not to say there aren't excellent 1965 strikings but finding cameo 65s is a struggle.
  8. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot

    I also think that part of the improved strike was due to hub replacement.

    I don't know about other series, but the Jefferson Nickel got a new reverse hub in 67 and I know that the Lincoln Cent got a new Obverse hub in 1969 (I understand, too late for SMS, but it was still a hub replacement in that same era.)
  9. roll searcher

    roll searcher coin hunter

    if its considered like a proof, why is it called a special mint set? Why not special proof set?
  10. zach67005

    zach67005 New Member

    I've some 67s that'll out proof some of my proofs.
  11. green18

    green18 Sweet on Commemorative Coins

    Because of the way the dies were produced. And it's not considered a proof set.....the designation is 'special mint set'.
  12. geekpryde

    geekpryde Husband and Father

    I think this thread needs a few pics:

    1965 50c.jpg 1966 50c.jpg 1967 50c.jpg
  13. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot

    It's called a Special Mint Set because that's what the US Mint named them

    Attached Files:

  14. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    True, but there's a bit more to it than that.

    For years before the mint had sold annual Mint Sets (business strikes) and annual Proof Sets (Proof strikes). But in '65 they stopped selling both. Instead they sold what they called Special Mint Sets. This name was to differentiate the sets from the Mint Sets and Proofs Sets of previous years, decades really. The mint was attempting to change what they offered to collectors.

    But after 2 years of the SMS sets and more complaints than they had ever had, the mint decided to go back to the way it was. They were too far along to produce Mint Sets and Proof Sets in '67 so they went ahead and produced the SMS in '67. But by '68 things were back to normal.
  15. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot

    well, some of us just read about it instead of living it, Doug

    I'd love to hear your first-hand accounts on the Spanish Inquisition when you have time ;)
  16. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    It was ugly Mike, it was really ugly :D

    Some cool coins from that period though ;)
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page