Options
1964 SMS Lincoln Cent - How can you tell if it’s really an SMS
Dreverett1
Posts: 81 ✭✭
Hello - is there a way to tell if you have an SMS 1964 Cent VS. just a Business strike Cent? I was hoping there maybe some die markers or anything that could help determine the difference. Here are photos of the OBV and REV. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks 
1
Comments
can you take a shot straight on?
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1964-1c-sms-rd/3284
To my knowledge, not a single 1964 SMS coin of any denomination has surfaced, other than from the sets that sold in a group of Stack’s sales in the early 90’s.
They aren't found in 1964 Proof or mint sets or in circulation. While the posted pictures aren’t particularly sharp, I’m extremely confident that the coin is not an SMS example.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
This may be cynical, but essentially the coin has to have an unbroken line of ownership from the Mint Director back in 1964 through to your acquisition of it today. Otherwise, it won't be considered an SMS. That might seem flippant, but it is largely true.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
3 million proofs.
Ten SMS's.
I go with it being proof.
It looks like a typical proof to me which is statistically the most likely choice.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
The best way to determine if a 1964 cent is an SMS cent is to send it to a top tier TPG for grading. Once graded you will know the answer to your question (Granted the TPG grade is only an "opinion" but in the hobby the "opinion" of a top tier TPG would be almost universally accepted on matters such as whether a 1964 dated coin is an SMS).
While that would be the best way, there are other, less expensive options, such as posting here. And in the case of ungraded 1964 coins, a “No, that isn’t an SMS example” answer is all but guaranteed to be correct.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Here are additional photos. It’s not a proof or doesn’t appear to be one. The surfaces are not reflective. The rims are deep and sharp. any assistance would be great. Thanks again!
actually the obverse photos so far seem to have some reflection.
take a set of photos straight on.
Agreed that straight-on shots would be better and based on what I’ve seen thus far, the coin looks Proof to me.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think the rims indicate proof.
let me play Devil's Advocate and ask the OP "What makes you think" it is an SMS?? do you have a coin or good images of a 1964 SMS Cent to compare it to?? aside from that, what experience do you have which could be brought to bear to bolster your assertion?? if all you have is that it looks unusual..................
just based on the pictures provided I believe it is just a 1964 Proof Cent.
.
I looked at some 1964 SMS cents in the Heritage archives. The coin pictured in this thread doesn't look like the ones I saw there.
Just sayin'.
Proofs of this period are not cameo like modern proofs.
As mentioned earlier, you just don't find 1964 SMS in the wild.
SMS coins are nothing more than the very first EDS coins struck. Someone once posted a display of first struck coins from a US mint visit for many different years and denominations years back here. Coins held in record for historical means by the mint. Sure, the dies may have been blasted by sand or diamond dust to remove the circular lines that form from the lathe cutting tool bit while making the master hubs. But the same dies are further used to make additional dies/master dies to working hubs to working dies. Similar to finding SMS coins grading MS68 to MS70 for years 2005 to date/2021 production. meant for mint sets in circulation.
And yes, such coins of EDS are special to own and demand a higher value. And they'll pop up from coin rolls now and then but don't expect convincing others as to what you think you have. Most collectors here and beyond are not even there yet, the knowledge and experience to appreciate an EDS example of workmanship. A waste of time and money to improve to others, Just enjoy the coin and have patience, others will come along.
It's unfortunate the coin developed carbon spots.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
.
That is certainly a nice cent (except for carbon spot)...But I would say it is a proof and not an SMS cent. Cheers, RickO
Leo, the coins in question, true 1964 SMS issues, cannot be disputed by a reasonable Numismatist armed with a modicum of knowledge. to do that as you have doesn't serve the Hobby well. the coins in question have a traceable Provenance, a discernible surface finish and identifiable diagnostics which aren't found on subsequent coins.
while there may be some dispute about their origin, unanswered questions about why they were made, their existence isn't in doubt. if you're struggling with that fact I suggest you search this forum or PM ?Giorgio?, he seems to be as knowledgeable as anyone about them.
I'm sorry. I just can't get that spot out of my head.
Pete
I spoke with George (VDB COINS) just this week thru an email.
He might be able to help you as he sold a 64 SMS Kennedy in 2016 thru Heritage.
He is quite knowledgeable on Lincolns.
Kennedys are my quest...
Here are are a few photos of the coin with straight on shots.
nah
surfaces would be matte on an SMS
It still looks like a mishandled proof (fingerprints, tarnish) to me.
Thank you for looking. Appreciate it
Yup, me thinks this cent has been exposed to environmental damage plus the latent. Not to mention the carbon dot. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon
Surfaces on 1964 SMS coins are not what people typically think of as “matte”. They are rather lustrous, more akin to a satin finish.
Here’s a PCGS 66 example:
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Can you guys tell me if you think mine is a 1964 sms or not? I need help figuring out how to post a picture of it.
It's not.
your profile shows you are not a full member yet.
it might be sometime next week before you are upgraded to allow uploading pictures
if you have some other site to post it, you can use the URL method of posting pictures.
Who's coin is this, @Dreverett1 or @KMO ?
Or does KMO have a different coin, but has not posted photos yet?
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Lol. Yup. Another one of those coins that just can't be found in the wild.
Check out this thread I did in May of last year about the different types of finishes that can be found on 1964 coins. All are common. I'll note that this doesn't include the 'SMS' finish. I think the satin finish examples can fool people into thinking they have an SMS coin, and it can be found on all denominations:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1037045/1964-proof-coin-finishes
That one reminded me of that cent that graded MS70 that had that spot on his nose that took over his face and pcgs paid up to make it good.
Hoard the keys.
Here's a SMS JN from CoinFacts..
And here's a regular businees strike I own.
First, I don't believe the SMS is actually toned (brown?) but is an off picture/color of the coin.
And both coins can be right clicked on to open in a new tab to see a much larger picture. But.....you'll need a laptop with a 15" wide screen to know/see what I'm talking about. Not a dinky 2" iphone. lol
But comparing these two coins, the steps look very similar. If higher coining pressure was used with the newest of dies to strike special coins, why don't we see more steps? We would like to think the SMS coin is a special strike, was handled carefully and didn't land into a hopper like the other coins. But if you look at the pillars on the SMS coin, one of them received quite a few little nicks as did the 3rd pillar. And there are other marks on the cheek and ear and steps and possibly a ding under the 3rd pillar although they are minor. Because of those nicks, I can picture someone at the mint was given some instructions to draw a few nickels/samples from the hopper after the first few 1000 coins were stamped or caught a few in hand as they were stamped because the fields are remarkably clean of marks. Picked out the best ones to later add to the other denominations to assembled a few very nice quality mint sets. And the coin press guy went about his business.
Like I said earlier in this thread, IMO these so called SMS coins are nothing more than carefully selected early die state examples to assemble some early mint sets. And likely was done on the bequest of someone who wanted such coins.
As a long time collector of Jefferson nickels, I have seen more than my share. I had an oppurtunity to buy one of these SMS coins years ago at an Indianapolis, Indiana coin show. I had the certified coin in hand and I'm sharing the very thoughts I had back then, 2006 I think, it just didn't impress me enough that it would improve the quality much of the coin I already had. I kept my $1600 and walked away. And yeah, later, I would regret not buying because of the prices some people paid for these.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection