Another for the SLQ DATE SET....Please feel free to comment or GTG! ***Grade Posted***

Walkerfan

This is number 9 of 14 for me.

I LIKE the 1925, because it is a PHILLY ONLY year, and the recessed date was a new design change.

PS--I paid up for this piece........A good move or a bad one?

Thank you for your thoughts.....

I will post the grade tomorrow.

PSS--I hope that you are all having a NICE holiday.....ME? I am drinking some beers and enjoying a paid holiday with family and friends

BuffaloIronTail

You picked a nice coin for the Holiday.

MS-65FH (If that's an ear hole that I see).

Happy Memorial Day!

Pete

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Smudge

FH 65 may go 66. Nice.

thefinn

Looks at least MS65 FH to me.

koynekwest

That's a nice coin! I have a date set too (excepting the 1916) but mine is mostly in the XF-AU range.

Walkerfan

@koynekwest said:
That's a nice coin! I have a date set too (excepting the 1916) but mine is mostly in the XF-AU range.

Thanks! Rather than buy a 1916; I may just buy two 1917 coins---a type one and a type two.

ricko

Beautiful SLQ... Lots of luster, I assume that 'mark' on the reverse is on the slab...I would say MS65, perhaps 66...That coin has been well cared for. Cheers, RickO

PQueue

Not a fan of the surfaces on either side.

DRUNNER

65+ and a great coin . . . . . just super!

Drunner

asheland

MS65

Connecticoin

Looks 66 FH to me. Regarding "paying up" - you will never regret paying up for quality like that.

DIMEMAN

Nice coin, All the rivets are there and Full. Only problem I see is the holder.

ThreeCentSilverFL

Wow nice strike there! MS66. Nice example!

coinbuf

Looks like an MS66FH to me. The only distraction I see is what might be some dip residue which may get darker over time.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

acloco

White ANACS or early NGC soap slab?

VERY nice!! Congratulations!!!

Walkerfan

Thanks for all the great guesses!

I believe that this is an NGC number 9 for those who care about slab history. It first appeared in July of 2001 and was used for 2 years.

CoinJunkie

Just curious why you "paid up" for this particular coin? Serious question, not trying to be flippant.

Walkerfan

@CoinJunkie I liked it. I thought it was 'all there' and PQ for the grade. I like older slabs, too. It deserves the green sticker, IMO, which was an added bonus.

roadrunner

That's a lot a coin for a 64 FH. Certainly worth a premium imo.

CoinJunkie

@Walkerfan said:
@CoinJunkie I liked it. I thought it was 'all there' and PQ for the grade. I like older slabs, too. It deserves the green sticker, which was an added bonus.

OK, thanks. The coin has a "dipped" look which I'm not attracted to, but everyone's taste is different. A lot of folks seem to think it's undergraded, which is always a good sign.

BUFFNIXX

1925 should be referred to as Type 3 because of the recessed date.

Walkerfan

@BUFFNIXX said:
1925 should be referred to as Type 3 because of the recessed date.

The PCGS price guide refers to the 1916 to 1917 bare breast as type 1, the 1917 to 1924 chain mail breast as type 2A and the 1925 to 1930 recessed date as type 2B, so there is a distinction.