New finds!!...Any thoughts????
Poordollaz47
Posts: 22 ✭
1959 D looks like a proof?!
not sure about this parking lot coin..but it looks like 1989 weighs 3.11!!...shall these go down in the books??!!
2
Comments
The 1959-D is a business strike. In those days Philadelphia did the minting of proofs and would have no mint mark. Also the strike isn’t nearly well defined enough or squared off rims.
As for the other, it’s very hard to determine the date. It is so mangled I would just spend it personally.
On the last penny there is a deep gouge just below the letter T. What would cause that?
Chevy?
RE: 1959 D looks like a proof?!
You need to go Back to School...
Album coins.... except for the last one....spend it or toss it...Cheers, RickO
You must have access to the Interwebs if you post here.
Haven't you seen a photo of a proof cent anywhere? (Aside from the mintmark issue).
The 1936 cents are very decent circulated examples with several cents each, but the others are pocket change.
Nice coins for to add to an album set.
The 59-D is not a proof, for the reasons @TurtleCat posted.
In order for the parking lot coin to have any value, a TPG would have to authenticate it as a post 1982 dated copper planchet, and I don't think there is any way to confirm the last digit. The 1st 8 looks like it may be the large date version. I believe all post 1982 cents use the small date version (snowman 8), which would rule out it being a 1988
Flip the 1959-D over and see if it is the rare Wheatback variety! (Or, is that only known to happen on P mint coins?)
I thought that was a mule
Welcome aboard
did your finds come from coin roll searching?
Kennedys are my quest...
Sorry, but there is nothing of any value there. The 2-3 cents you could get for the 1936 cents would not pay for the costs related to selling them. The other coins are just spending money.
@WAYNEAS they did!...circulated bank rolls