What is a Proof coin with Very Strong Cartwheel Luster called?

Yes, probably. I've seen MD on proof coins, but most of my proof coins have very little to no obvious MD. Although, with this '64 coin, they probably worked the dies to death.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The opposite happened with matte proof 1c and 5c dies. As the die struck more coins they tended to get "shinier." The best EDS matte proofs are so dull they look like they're made of chalk or plaster. I once had two 1916 MP Buffs and when viewed side by side the difference was pretty dramatic.

 

It doesn't take that much wear on a proof die before the flow lines that create luster start appearing (new proof dies do not show luster) Today they retire the proof dies when they start showing those lines (after about 3,500 coins). Back then they would use the dies longer, and then would often polish them to remove the flow lines and continue using them.

The dies on the OP coin would not be considered worn for a business strike die, but for a proof die they would be.

 

Gem Proof

 

So, I'm wondering, if one were to seek these "Cartwheel Proofs" (I'm not sure there's an official name for them, so I'm calling it this) from the Mint directly, should one purchase proof coins from the Mint well after the initial offerings? Does the Mint typically have a timeline for how long these proofs are offered? If so, then do you order proofs during the final week? For example, if it's a 12 week production cycle, do you order the specific proof coin at week 12? Or, is it all a toss up as far as what you'll get, since there's no telling when the proof dies will be replaced or maintained? Or if the dies aren't worked to death like in the era of the '64 coin, and dies typically last until the last run, is the Mint consistent with releasing "Cartwheel Proofs" in their last batch?

I think these "Cartwheel Proofs" are superior to the "Proof-Like" strikes, so this would be preferred in my book (IMHO for my collection, Cartwheel Proof > Proof-Like > Proof > Business).

 

@iPen I get a real kick out of reading your well-thought out questions.

 

It's my impression that, for limited runs such as Proofs and "special" issues, including ASE's, the entire mintage is struck (or at least the majority of it) before the coin is released. That's what puts the lie to those stupid "First Strike" designations.

 

So, once proofs are struck, they're not placed in chronological order, to be released from earliest strike to latest strike? I'm wondering if they're simply stacked in a large room in boxes, one on top of another, wouldn't the very first batch be the latest strikes, which would stand a better chance of having cartwheel luster? Too bad I don't know anyone that works at the Mint. I doubt they'll let me know if I asked them for security reasons lol.

And yeah, I read that NGC lost a lawsuit regarding such terms, but PCGS won and they're able to maintain such phrases on their labels.

 

My previous post got me looking closer at things, for a clearer idea of where the lawsuits went. To clarify my last, at least with the issues at stake in the lawsuits (2005-2006 vintage), the Mint stated it had approximately half the production finished when they were first released and did nothing to have any record of what coin was minted when upon their release. They don't even know which ones were "struck first."

Near as I can tell (reading between the lines), PCGS basically communicated that they'd take the issue to the wall legally, and the plaintiffs decided they didn't have the resources for endless appeals. My disgust with that company knows no bounds.

 

If I may add, in answer to the question, a beautiful, highly collectible coin, period.

 

Pssst: "Flow lines".

 

What is a Proof coin with Very Strong Cartwheel Luster called?

Easy, A proof

 

A business strike coin with deep mirroring is also called a business strike coin.

But the specific categorization we give it is proof-like or DMPL...

 

What is a Proof coin with Very Strong Cartwheel Luster called?

Yes, very true. So what?

 

I'm drawing parallels...

As 'deep mirrored business strike coins are business strike coins', is to 'deep mirrored business strike coins are DMPL or proof-like'; 'strong cartwheel proof strike coins are proof coins', is to 'strong cartwheel proof strike coins are __________'.

In other words, the statement that 'strong cartwheel luster proofs are proofs' is absolutely true, but in context and wittiness/jokes aside, there's a mismatch in parallel thought. If we leave it at that, then why not apply the same reasoning to (and the removal of) classifications such as "proof-like" or "DMPL"? Collectors seem to actively seek out this type of proof coin, so it seems to merit its own title.

 

DMPL Business Strikes are greater than the standard for the original. Proofs which show less than flawless surfaces and brilliant reflectivity are lesser than the standard. Regardless of subjective opinion (I love the coin), the one posted in the OP is of lesser quality than one should expect of a Proof. If we categorize that, it would be a detraction.

 

Yes, that's a good way of looking at it.

Unless someone points out an actual numismatic term for it, I'll unofficially call them "worn die proofs" or "cartwheel proofs" for my own purposes, since I'm looking for those (dis)qualities in proofs.

 

The actual term would be that it is a 61 MAYBE A 62, By the terms of a proof, fractures and hair lines in the field and devices, ( flow lines) are considered a lower grade. Less proof like. late die state but a gorgeous unmarked one!

 

By, the way I think it should sell in appearance for 68 money!