Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Coinsandmedals, post: 4311962, member: 107435&quot;]I unexpectedly won this coin at an auction last year, and although it is not as nice as most examples I have been offered since, I paid relatively little for this coin, and I have a weakness for early circulated proofs. This coin, as expected, came back in a details holder. I had this down as XF details, and it appears NGC agreed because of the rim damage.</p><p><br /></p><p>[USER=19165]@physics-fan3.14[/USER] you asked an excellent question. The proof strikes of this series are distinct in that the denticles are long, and flan extends beyond them. The denticles on the business strikes almost invariably run into the edges of the coin and negate the possibility of the flan extending beyond them. This is also prevalent with the English proof coppers struck at the Royal Mint during the same time period, which is well documented.</p><p><br /></p><p>It seems as though both NGC and PCGS have issues getting this designation correct, and this coin, like many others, will be making its way back to the TPG for them to correct the &quot;Mechanical&quot; error of not listing it as &quot;Proof XF details&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>1775 Ireland proof 1/2 Penny</b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>My grade: XF details</b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>[ATTACH=full]1096498[/ATTACH] </b>[/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