I have not found anything about it by googling so far. I may have found... well I will just post the pictures and let you guys decide.
Unfortunately it's a sealed proof set... it would only ruin the value to open it and actually examine the coin... if it is an error it's a small one. However I can't find anything on Google so it may be the discovery coin.
It’s a proof coin so leave as in. It’s a very minor error and the packaging is necessary to show it’s an error.
I'm wondering the same. The "doubling" looks like simple reflection between the mirror field and the case, and the spot is just that -- a spot, a flaw. It might be a strike-through...?
I would have responded sooner but I didn't think anyone would reply that fast. My apologies. I have more pictures. I am referring to the mark between the hoof and the E. The inset that it's in is not damaged and the plastic is smooth to the touch. So I don't think it's the plastic. Also it's never been opened so it would have to been done during mint or whatever put it in the display.
If it is mint error it's hardly anything... but it could be the only on of its kind. Knowing my luck though it's more then likely nothing.
It might be a strike-through, or it might be some form of damage. Either way, I'm pretty sure it detracts rather than adding value. I've returned coins to the Mint for similar flaws. I imagine a TPG would dock the coin's grade for something like this, whether or not they designated it as an error.
The real challenge in coin collecting is finding one without defects or noticeable variances. I've looked at many coins in my 75+years of active collecting, and, I spent my employment career in Quality Management functions. The mint, like all manufacturing operations, has targets (design specifications) and these targets have tolerances. Every piece cannot be exact to spec, and the closer we look the more out of spec they appear.
@russlle I should mention that many variances are fun to collect. They might not be rare mint errors but they do give us a challenge and a little excitement. Pick out some you like and search for them. Welcome to Coin Talk.
So not worth sending in to get graded then. Bummer not surprised though. I appreciate everyone taking the time to look though. Hypothetically: if it had ended up being something. Would I send in just the one display to get graded? It seems like even if the error was the only thing that gave the set increased value that I would sell the whole set not just the one and break up the set. However if I sold it as the whole set. Would not having the rest of the set graded decrease the overall value?
I am missing 1968 and 1975. Otherwise I have at least 1 quarter of every year from 1965-2023. I am missing many of the different reverses for the 2000s. Once I have 1 of each then it will be trying trying to get a Denver and Philadelphia of each. I had a full set of Jefferson nickels from 1938-1961. I currently have 8 not in their slots... but these blue collector's books do not do a great job of keeping them in place. I have at least 1 of each year of. the lincoln pennys from 1909- 2009 except for these years. 1921, 1922, 1931, 1933, 2008. I have not started my dime collection yet though. Oh I have a collection of random foreign coins to. My favorite or those is a mystery bag that have had every marking removed from circulation.
You can send any coin grading. For mint errors you would send it for Attribution also. That's a separate fee. It can get costly so for a minor strike through its not worth it IMHO And.. the plural for Penny is Pennies, not pennys
Good news: you're only missing one year. There aren't any US quarters dated 1975 -- all the ones struck in 1975 had the Bicentennial design, and the "1776-1976" date.