Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 701615, member: 19165&quot;]What You Need To Know about the Type II Reverse Franklin...</p><p>.... And quite a bit you didn&#039;t. </p><p><br /></p><p>by Jason Poe</p><p><br /></p><p>There is an interesting variety known on 1958 and 1959 business strike Franklins: the Type I and Type II reverses. The Type I is also known as the ‘weak eagle,’ and Type II is the ‘strong eagle.’ The Type II reverse is from dies which were intended for proof coinage, but accidentally used on business strikes instead. </p><p><br /></p><p>The story starts in 1956, with the proof coinage of that year. In 1956, the eagle was redesigned on the proof coinage, to strengthen the details. Look on the reverse of a Franklin, at the eagle. Now look at the bottom of the eagle, and see the branch he is perched on? You will see several feathers to the left of the perch – these feathers are the key to distinguishing the Type I and II. Type I eagles have four somewhat indistinct feathers to the left of the perch; Type II eagles have three distinct, strong feathers to the left of the perch. These two varieties are well known on the 1956 proof coinage, and while the Type I 1956 proof is hard to find, many collectors choose to get one of each 1956 proof variety for their sets. </p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/Eaglecomparison.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>These pictures show a normal business strike Type I eagle on the left (with 4 feathers on the left), and a Type II business strike eagle on the right (with 3 much stronger feathers on the left). </p><p><br /></p><p>What is much less well known, however, is that the mint made a mistake on a small number of business strike coins in 1958 and 1959. Business strike coins are supposed to have the Type I eagle, but some coins in these years were struck with the Type II reverse. These only occurred on Philadelphia mint Franklins (because that is where proofs were struck at the time – proof dies would not have been shipped to branch mints). Very few people know about the Type I and II business strikes, so they don’t generally garner much of a premium despite their seeming scarcity. It is rumored that the Type II reverse is found on P mint business strikes on all years from 1956 to 1963, but I have only seen specimens from 1958 and 1959. In talking with a couple Franklin variety specialists, 1958 and 1959 are the only years they are aware of Type II reverses. </p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/JPA826obverse.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/JPA826reverse.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>This is my 1958 Type II reverse, graded MS-65 by NGC. It is very hard to find Type II’s this nice. </p><p><br /></p><p>In 1958 especially, the Type II reverses come from retired proof dies that were put back into service. Many of these dies exhibit die chips and other late die state characteristics, as well as showing significant deterioration in the bell lines. Full Bell Line 1958 Type II Franklins are exceedingly scarce, as are coins graded 65 or above. Bret Parrish states that the 1958 Type II’s are not found in mint sets, which is one of the primary sources of higher graded specimens in any given year. The leading theory currently is that 1958 Type II’s were minted from dies which had previously been used to strike proof coinage. This explains the later die state of many 1958 examples, and the prevalence of die cracks. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/JPA825obverse.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/JPA825reverse.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>This is my 1959 Type II reverse, graded MS-65 by Anacs. It’s easier to find the 1959 in nice condition, but this one is special – it is semi-prooflike. </p><p><br /></p><p>The 1959 Type II is much easier to find than the 1958, and usually comes in better condition. These are found in mint sets, which makes it easier to find specimens in better condition. A Franklin specialist I talked with on CoinTalk, jaceravone, says he has found 4 of the 1959 Type II’s in mint sets, including one set which had both a Franklin and Washington Type II reverse. The 1959 Type II is also occasionally found in prooflike or semi-prooflike condition, and is found more often with FBL’s than the elusive 1958. This makes sense because the Type II was intended for proof coinage – if the dies were polished and treated like normal proof dies, but then accidentally used to strike business strike coinage, the coins will be prooflike. The dies used were not completely finished proof dies; they somehow got diverted before the final polishing. Fully prooflike coins are incredibly scarce (NGC has only graded three, one of which is coinman1794’s MS65PL specimen shown below) All known prooflike 1959 Franklins are Type II. Given that they were new and fresh dies, the presence of FBL’s is also expected, and FBL Type II’s are more common in 1959 than the previous year. </p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/1959o50PL.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/1959r50PL.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>Douglas, aka coinman1794, owns this beautiful 1959 NGC MS-65PL Type II. I tried to get him to sell it to me, but he refused <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Another layer of intrigue is added to the Type II saga with the presence of a striking Double Die Reverse on some 1959 Franklins. This is a Class III hub doubling, known as Design Hub Doubling because it is created when a design of two different types is used on successive hubbings. This is the same type of doubling which produced the famous 1878 8 over 7 tail feathers Morgan Dollars, and some 1960 cents. The 1959 Franklin is a Type II over Type I eagle, evident most strongly on the right side of the eagle (viewer’s left). There is also doubling on the hanger and E Pluribus Unum. It is listed in the Cherrypicker’s Guide as FS-801, and the CONECA master files as DDR-001, 1-R-III. It is less common than the ordinary Type II, but FBL’s can be found. Our friend Douglas, aka coinman1794, currently has a PCGS MS-66FBL example of this DDR for sale!</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/1959ddr20C.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>Close-ups of the 1959 Type II over Type I DDR courtesy of coinman1794.</p><p><br /></p><p>Breen estimates, and Tomaska repeats, that about 20% of business strikes received the Type II reverse, but I think that figure is way too high. Breen actually gets this figure from an article written by a numismatist named WW Edwards. He and a group of fellow Franklin enthusiasts spent a great deal of time studying the Type II Franklin in the early ‘70’s, and a lot of what we know today is thanks to them. They identified several different dies used on the Type II reverses, mostly using die cracks and polish lines. Thus, according to his classification, my 1958 is a II-c-1, which can be identified by the die break in between the IB of Pluribus (see the picture below). Using his rationale and figures, about 20% of the 1958 and 35% of the 1959 reverses are Type II. He identifies 4 1958 dies, and 3 1959 dies (plus 1 DDR die). The problem with his numbers, especially for the 1958 coins, is that many of them appear to be recycled proof dies, which had already struck many coins. The 1958 dies would not have been able to strike as many coins as fresh dies would have, so the numbers would be much smaller. The evidence of numerous die cracks and breaks also seems to indicate that the Type II design was weaker and would not last as long – so the number of coins minted would not be as great as he estimates. </p><p><br /></p><p>Thus, if we take as ‘a priori’ that the vast majority of people are unaware of this issue, then we can assume that the distribution in a large marketplace such as Ebay will mirror the actual distribution. There will not be a higher percentage present on Ebay versus the whole population, because the Type II is not marketed, promoted, or valued significantly higher. Thus, careful watching of the Ebay population should give us a decent estimate of the correct percentage of Type II reverses. After watching the 1958 Franklin half dollars on Ebay for a period of time, I am of the opinion that Type II reverse appear on roughly 2% of surviving 1958 half dollars. I looked at about 350 half dollars, and confirmed just 5 Type II reverses. The percentage might be slightly higher due to a number of inadequate photographs, but it is not going to be that much higher. The number will be slightly higher for 1959 Type II’s, but not significantly. </p><p><br /></p><p>I’ll leave you with pictures of Doug’s 1959 PCGS MS-66FBL FS-801 Type II over Type I DDR – the highest graded of that variety, and a beautiful coin. </p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/1959oDDRa.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><img src="http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk68/physicsfan/Franklins/1959rDDR.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Well, I hope you learned something! Now get out there and start CherryPicking!</p><p><br /></p><p>Feel free to nominate for Thread of the Week, even though its broken. It&#039;ll make me feel good <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><br /></p><p>Special thanks to franklinlvr and coinman1794 (on the NGC boards), and jaceravone (on CoinTalk) for help with this article.[/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