Specimen 1917 quarter and 1795 Half Eagle

The Mega Red Book says something like this: "There are no known proof of this type, but there is a couple 1917 certified as specimens"
"There are no known proof of this type, but there is one 1795 graded specimen"
Any information on these

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The 1795 $5 is by NGC

 

Any info???

 

I Googled. Found squat.

 

I too googled the mentioned quarter and within 1-2 minutes had found what should more than sufficiently address your question. Give it a try.

 

and also the 1917 specimen buffalo nickel.

 

I don't see that

 

Did you honestly even try?

Google "1917 quarter specimen" and spend a few moments searching. I'll even go one step further and recommend a thread from another forum (hint, hint).

 

Is it https://forums.collectors.com/discu...-a-1917-type-1-proof-standing-liberty-quarter
?????????????

 

For Christ's sake! Read it and find out!

 

I'm catholic, so just saying for all religous christian, please don't say that

 

Try this:

If you have a question, think for yourself and do your own research before asking others to spoon-feed everything to you.

But since I doubt you will change, you will simply be the first I put on my “ignore” list.

 

I understand the teach a man to fish verses give a man to fish mind set...I really do. But this is a place where questions get answered. If your not going to answer his question why even respond to this thread?

 

Exactly 100 percent agree with you!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You to

 

The same goes for you, Cam, but apparently you feel it's perfectly okay to add absolutely nothing other to the thread than hypocritical complaining.

This young man often feels the need to spam other threads with copy/paste crap he finds online, yet can't even be so bothered as to make even the most modest effort to search out an answer his own questions or even read what he does find? If you want to coddle him, that's great and your choice, but don't preach to me - the only one who has thus far offered any assistance - until you've at least made a similar effort.

 

I get tired of YOU and a handful of others around here harassing people asking these kinds of questions. There is nothing wrong with their question. For got whatever reason YOU like to give snippy responses when the information is easily available. If you don’t want to help the OP than don’t respond to his posts.

This is a place of learning.

If you don’t like how this member posts...put him in your ignore list.

 

And I get tired of folks like YOU who rarely if ever actually try to answer "these kinds of questions", instead only showing up to play the numismatic equivalent of a white knight, adding nothing nor even trying to help the folks they feign caring about.

Twice now you've posted to this thread while making absolutely no attempt to do the very thing you fault me for actually doing. I'm soul crushingly sorry that my approach isn't to your lofty standards, Mr. Perfect, but unlike many others, yourself included, at least I try. Next time try practicing what you preach, hero.

God forbid someone be pressed to do something for themselves. If, as you kindly pointed out, the "information is easily available" then it shouldn't be too much to send him in the right direction without having to deal with this mind-numbing hypocrisy.

 

Your information is confusing. 1817 Qt I get, but the other?As you said about no Proofs is correct in the Red Book. In the Walter Breen's book it list a possibly that 6 satin-finish proofs are reported and have or should have exceptionally sharp central details as believed. See page 362.

 

I answer questions all the time. If you’d spend time trying to be helpful and not being a blow hard...then maybe you’d know that.

As for the 1917 specimens. I have read several conflicting things about them and I don’t know what is accurate. I was hoping that I might learn the answer when I found this thread but then YOU ruined the thread.