Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Unattributed Franklin Variety
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Anntron, post: 8170482, member: 109580"][USER=1765]@messydesk[/USER],</p><p> Sorry for the delay, life happens.</p><p>At the risk of being pedantic:</p><p><br /></p><p> I have been collecting varieties of Franklins for the past several years. I have well over 100 slabbed pieces of both Proof and CS variety specimens. About half of my collection is “cherry-picked” with the remainder having been purchased. Some are attributed but that is not important to me as a specialist in Franklin varieties. Sometimes the fact that TGSs’ do not attribute can be an advantage!</p><p><br /></p><p> I have been hunting the 1958 PCGS MS-65 FBL Type 2 since I started. Since 1999, I have only seen one on eBay:</p><p>1958 FRANKLIN 50c PCGS MS65FBL "WHITE BLAZER" Item number: 8314631702 US Sold @$282.99 Jul-02-05 19:45:00 PDT PCGS Holder #86674.7943882</p><p><br /></p><p>Sadly, I was being overconfident at the relative obscurity of this variety and did not put my max bid high enough. Oh Well, can’t (afford to) win‘em all!</p><p><br /></p><p>Below are some numbers to give you some additional insight reaffirming your post in this thread as to the rarity of this variety for 1958 in any uncirculated condition.</p><p><br /></p><p>Between 1999 and 2001, I studied 769 eBay images of the 1958 slabbed and raw Franklins in MS-63 or better that one could differentiate the Reverse variety. The 1958 P results are:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><u>Type</u> <u>Type 1</u> <u>Type 2</u></p><p>Total 754 <b>15</b></p><p>Percent 98% <b>2%</b></p><p><br /></p><p>My hypothesis is that Breen was wrong in his 20% estimate for CS 1958 Type 2. He overstated by a factor of 10.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have also tracked the 1959 Type 2 Franklin reverse coins. As to the DDRs, while the difference between the Type 1 and Type 2 reverses is perceptible to the trained eye, the DDR takes magnification to actually identify. Therefore, I did not consider the images usually available on eBay to have adequate resolution to identify the DDR reverse.</p><p><br /></p><p>During the same period, I studied 1176 images of 1959 slabbed and raw Franklins in MS-63 or better that you could differentiate the Reverse variety Type 1 & 2 only. Type 1 <u>over</u> Type 2 DDR number is only for coins that are attributed by the seller or third party. My 1959 P findings are:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><b>Type</b> <u>Type 1</u> <u>Type 2 </u> <u>Type DDR</u></p><p>Total 894 <b>271</b> 11</p><p>Percent 76% <b>23%</b> 1%</p><p><br /></p><p>My hypothesis is that Breen was wrong in his 70% estimate for CS 1959 Type 2. He overstated by a factor of 3.5. However, I believe that his 70% figure is either a misprint or an editor’s mistake and should have read 30%. The 70% figure would have been consistent with my finding of the 1959 Type 1, not the Type 2.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p> It should also be noted that I have never observed the 1958 Type 2 in Mint packaged 1958 Mint sets, however, I have found several 1959 Type 2 Franklins in Mint packaged 1959 Mint sets. I believe this is the reason Breen overstated the percentages for the 1959 Type 2 variety. This is also the reason why many examples of the 1959 Type 2 Franklins exist in higher grades than the 1958 Type 2 reverses.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p> There is precedent for this disparity. There is evidence that toward the end of the 1958 P Franklin run at the Philadelphia Mint, the normal Type 1 reverse Working Dies were spent. The Mint Die room was in a tizzy trying to prepare for the new Memorial cent reverse. In addition, the engravers were busy re-engraving the Franklin reverse for the 1960 Franklin production year. For expediency’s sake, some of the coining floor Franklin presses were loaded with the Proof reverse Working Dies. The relatively small 1958-P Franklin run was completed with some Proof reverse Working Dies but the story does not end there. Beginning in 1959, again the proof Working Dies were put into service on Franklin CS presses. We know this timing is plausible because no Type 2 1958 reverses appeared in mint sets but the 1959 Type 2 is readily found in mint sets. This is ascribed to the mint’s practice, in the late ’50s, of pulling out CS mint set coins at the beginning of the coinage year. Type 2 1958 reverses were struck late in the year and 1959 Type 2 reverses were struck early in the production year.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here are the actual Philadelphia Mint Working Die stats for the Franklin Half Dollar. Sadly, these stats do not differentiate between Normal and Proof reverse Working Dies used on business strikes.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>For 1958:</b></p><p><br /></p><p><b>For 50c business strikes</b> - obverse dies used = 20 (or avg. 203,400 pcs per die) <b>- reverse dies used = 22 (or avg. 184,909 pcs per die)</b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p>For 50c proof strikes - obverse dies used = 213 (or avg. 4,818 pcs per die) <b>- </b>reverse dies used = 184 (or avg. 5,577 pcs per die)</p><p><br /></p><p><b>For 1959:</b></p><p><br /></p><p><b>For 50c business strikes</b> - obverse dies used = 35 (or avg. 179,837 pcs per die) - <b>reverse dies used = 23 (or avg. 273,665 pcs per die)</b></p><p><br /></p><p>For 50c proof strikes - obverse dies used =199 (or avg. 6,566 pcs per die) - reverse dies used = 183 (or avg. 7,140 pcs per die)</p><p><br /></p><p> I have always wondered why the major numismatic reference publications give only a cursory mention, if at all, to the reverse varieties of the 1958 & 1959 CS Franklins but seem to openly recognize the similar 1956 Proof Type 1 and 2 varieties. The importance of the 58-59 T1 & T2 varieties is just as significant as the Jefferson Reverse 38/ Reverse 40, the Morgan 1878 7/8 tail feathers, or the A_M Lincoln varieties. This Franklin variety is discernable to the naked eye, represents an intentional variety by the Mint, and mules a Proof reverse Working Die with a CS obverse Working Die coin.</p><p><br /></p><p> My conclusions are based solely on empirical observations and then only on items, which I have observed. In truth, there could have been literally hundreds of auctions I missed or that did not meet my criteria for recording. Either way, I do believe that the multitude of Franklin varieties are fun to collect and, because of their relative obscurity, very reasonably obtainable.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>OOPs! Guess I was a little pedantic….<img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie104" alt=":yawn:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Anntron, post: 8170482, member: 109580"][USER=1765]@messydesk[/USER], Sorry for the delay, life happens. At the risk of being pedantic: I have been collecting varieties of Franklins for the past several years. I have well over 100 slabbed pieces of both Proof and CS variety specimens. About half of my collection is “cherry-picked” with the remainder having been purchased. Some are attributed but that is not important to me as a specialist in Franklin varieties. Sometimes the fact that TGSs’ do not attribute can be an advantage! I have been hunting the 1958 PCGS MS-65 FBL Type 2 since I started. Since 1999, I have only seen one on eBay: 1958 FRANKLIN 50c PCGS MS65FBL "WHITE BLAZER" Item number: 8314631702 US Sold @$282.99 Jul-02-05 19:45:00 PDT PCGS Holder #86674.7943882 Sadly, I was being overconfident at the relative obscurity of this variety and did not put my max bid high enough. Oh Well, can’t (afford to) win‘em all! Below are some numbers to give you some additional insight reaffirming your post in this thread as to the rarity of this variety for 1958 in any uncirculated condition. Between 1999 and 2001, I studied 769 eBay images of the 1958 slabbed and raw Franklins in MS-63 or better that one could differentiate the Reverse variety. The 1958 P results are: [U]Type[/U] [U]Type 1[/U] [U]Type 2[/U] Total 754 [B]15[/B] Percent 98% [B]2%[/B] My hypothesis is that Breen was wrong in his 20% estimate for CS 1958 Type 2. He overstated by a factor of 10. I have also tracked the 1959 Type 2 Franklin reverse coins. As to the DDRs, while the difference between the Type 1 and Type 2 reverses is perceptible to the trained eye, the DDR takes magnification to actually identify. Therefore, I did not consider the images usually available on eBay to have adequate resolution to identify the DDR reverse. During the same period, I studied 1176 images of 1959 slabbed and raw Franklins in MS-63 or better that you could differentiate the Reverse variety Type 1 & 2 only. Type 1 [U]over[/U] Type 2 DDR number is only for coins that are attributed by the seller or third party. My 1959 P findings are: [B]Type[/B] [U]Type 1[/U] [U]Type 2 [/U] [U]Type DDR[/U] Total 894 [B]271[/B] 11 Percent 76% [B]23%[/B] 1% My hypothesis is that Breen was wrong in his 70% estimate for CS 1959 Type 2. He overstated by a factor of 3.5. However, I believe that his 70% figure is either a misprint or an editor’s mistake and should have read 30%. The 70% figure would have been consistent with my finding of the 1959 Type 1, not the Type 2. It should also be noted that I have never observed the 1958 Type 2 in Mint packaged 1958 Mint sets, however, I have found several 1959 Type 2 Franklins in Mint packaged 1959 Mint sets. I believe this is the reason Breen overstated the percentages for the 1959 Type 2 variety. This is also the reason why many examples of the 1959 Type 2 Franklins exist in higher grades than the 1958 Type 2 reverses. There is precedent for this disparity. There is evidence that toward the end of the 1958 P Franklin run at the Philadelphia Mint, the normal Type 1 reverse Working Dies were spent. The Mint Die room was in a tizzy trying to prepare for the new Memorial cent reverse. In addition, the engravers were busy re-engraving the Franklin reverse for the 1960 Franklin production year. For expediency’s sake, some of the coining floor Franklin presses were loaded with the Proof reverse Working Dies. The relatively small 1958-P Franklin run was completed with some Proof reverse Working Dies but the story does not end there. Beginning in 1959, again the proof Working Dies were put into service on Franklin CS presses. We know this timing is plausible because no Type 2 1958 reverses appeared in mint sets but the 1959 Type 2 is readily found in mint sets. This is ascribed to the mint’s practice, in the late ’50s, of pulling out CS mint set coins at the beginning of the coinage year. Type 2 1958 reverses were struck late in the year and 1959 Type 2 reverses were struck early in the production year. Here are the actual Philadelphia Mint Working Die stats for the Franklin Half Dollar. Sadly, these stats do not differentiate between Normal and Proof reverse Working Dies used on business strikes. [B]For 1958:[/B] [B]For 50c business strikes[/B] - obverse dies used = 20 (or avg. 203,400 pcs per die) [B]- reverse dies used = 22 (or avg. 184,909 pcs per die) [/B] For 50c proof strikes - obverse dies used = 213 (or avg. 4,818 pcs per die) [B]- [/B]reverse dies used = 184 (or avg. 5,577 pcs per die) [B]For 1959:[/B] [B]For 50c business strikes[/B] - obverse dies used = 35 (or avg. 179,837 pcs per die) - [B]reverse dies used = 23 (or avg. 273,665 pcs per die)[/B] For 50c proof strikes - obverse dies used =199 (or avg. 6,566 pcs per die) - reverse dies used = 183 (or avg. 7,140 pcs per die) I have always wondered why the major numismatic reference publications give only a cursory mention, if at all, to the reverse varieties of the 1958 & 1959 CS Franklins but seem to openly recognize the similar 1956 Proof Type 1 and 2 varieties. The importance of the 58-59 T1 & T2 varieties is just as significant as the Jefferson Reverse 38/ Reverse 40, the Morgan 1878 7/8 tail feathers, or the A_M Lincoln varieties. This Franklin variety is discernable to the naked eye, represents an intentional variety by the Mint, and mules a Proof reverse Working Die with a CS obverse Working Die coin. My conclusions are based solely on empirical observations and then only on items, which I have observed. In truth, there could have been literally hundreds of auctions I missed or that did not meet my criteria for recording. Either way, I do believe that the multitude of Franklin varieties are fun to collect and, because of their relative obscurity, very reasonably obtainable. OOPs! Guess I was a little pedantic….:yawn:[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Unattributed Franklin Variety
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...