Home U.S. Coin Forum

Any thoughts on this being a 1921 PEACE DOLLAR Satin or matte Proof-VAM 1-H?

Best Answer

«13

Answers


  • ifthevamzarockinifthevamzarockin Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Welcome to the forum & nice coin! :)

    Because the die was used for satin proofs and business strikes I'm not sure how to know where the cut off is.
    Fair chance @messydesk may be able to help here.
    David Close was the discoverer of the 1H and may have insight on LDS markers.
    He is a member on vamworld.com and if you post a photo there, good chance he will see it and respond.

  • ifthevamzarockinifthevamzarockin Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko "Your coin appears to have been harshly cleaned/whizzed.. "

    Vam 1H shows many die file lines. ;)

  • @ricko said:
    @Buildging91... Welcome aboard.... Your coin appears to have been harshly cleaned/whizzed.. Cheers, RickO

    I've seen harshly cleaned and whizzed Peace dollars- I just don't see it. Cleaned probably, what you may see as harshly cleaned are satin proof polished die marks. "I think" -thanks for the feed back.

  • @dcarr said:
    I think there is a decent chance that it is an actual proof issue.

    At a minimum, it is definitely the VAM-1H dies.

    Thank you for the feedback.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 21,395 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 10:39AM

    @Buildging91 said:

    @ricko said:
    @Buildging91... Welcome aboard.... Your coin appears to have been harshly cleaned/whizzed.. Cheers, RickO

    I've seen harshly cleaned and whizzed Peace dollars- I just don't see it. Cleaned probably, what youway may see as harshly cleaned are satin proof polished die marks. "I think" -thanks for the feed back.

    I'm not sure either way. What is going on in the cheek? Is that an artifact of the photo?

    There's also a lot going on between the rays on the right side of the reverse.

    I would hesitate to make any conclusion from the photos.

  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 15,369 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 9:45AM

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is a decent chance that it is an actual proof issue.

    At a minimum, it is definitely the VAM-1H dies.

    aside from those images which are nice and clear but at a tilt and highly over-exposed, i agree that something doesn't sit right with this coin from those images.

    @Buildging91

    the ES from states and OF show the proper die polishing lines for 1H and also there are 2 gouges at the base of the tailfeathers, you can see them on the 1P page from images of an example i had years ago circled in red that i was informed were on the Hub.

    as to this coin being any more than simply from those dies, we need a better picture to say for certain. move your lights around a bit so they don't over-expose the surfaces.

    thanks

    <--- look what's behind the mask!

  • @LanceNewmanOCC said:

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is a decent chance that it is an actual proof issue.

    At a minimum, it is definitely the VAM-1H dies.

    aside from those images which are nice and clear but at a tilt and highly over-exposed, i agree that something doesn't sit right with this coin from those images.

    @Buildging91

    the ES from states and OF show the proper die polishing lines for 1H and also there are 2 gouges at the base of the tailfeathers, you can see them on the 1P page from images of an example i had years ago circled in red that i was informed were on the Hub.

    as to this coin being any more than simply from those dies, we need a better picture to say for certain. move your lights around a bit so they don't over-expose the surfaces.

    thanks

    Okay-Thank you Lance

  • @Buildging91 said:

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is a decent chance that it is an actual proof issue.

    At a minimum, it is definitely the VAM-1H dies.

    aside from those images which are nice and clear but at a tilt and highly over-exposed, i agree that something doesn't sit right with this coin from those images.

    @Buildging91

    the ES from states and OF show the proper die polishing lines for 1H and also there are 2 gouges at the base of the tailfeathers, you can see them on the 1P page from images of an example i had years ago circled in red that i was informed were on the Hub.

    as to this coin being any more than simply from those dies, we need a better picture to say for certain. move your lights around a bit so they don't over-expose the surfaces.

    thanks

    Okay-Thank you Lance

  • @ColonelJessup said:
    paging @MrEureka. He's betterer with mattes, but likely has a fighting chance on this one.

    The obverse strike is beyond anything I've seen on a commercial emission. If it weren't for what appear to be dies lines (and not necessarily positioned as for the appropriate die variety), I'd it was a spoof, albeit a brilliant craftily numismatically astute one. It looks too good.

    Better than a couple I've owned (none "TPG" proofs) including one Jack Lee and I split after he showed it to me. We liked them on "feel". Subsequent research has validated the withdrawal of "proof" status hobby-wide.

    Same kind of treatment of the dies as for '07 Wire Edge $10's. Not as invasive on the Rolled Edges. Or consider what Dave Bowers and others used to call "wheat-straw" dies striations in the fields of many post-1933 D-Mint Walkers.

    Thank you @ColonelJessup for the insightful feedback!

  • ifthevamzarockinifthevamzarockin Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You are taking some great photos! :)

    Some with a little less glare and level photos rather than at an angle would help a bit.
    If you are able to get close-ups of some of the die scratches and other markers it would help. ;)

  • @ifthevamzarockin- Okay-Thank you!

  • Besides the hammered strike, don't think I've ever seen such detail in the talons, amazing. Thanks for sharing and hope it is a satin proof.

  • rip_frip_f Posts: 203 ✭✭✭

    What a beautiful coin!
    It would pair nicely with the 2021 tribute coming soon.

    It may have been wiped gently with a jeweler's cloth at some point, but not whizzed - wouldn't the whizzers have worked harder on the pin scratch under the L I and into the crown?

  • Buildging91Buildging91 Posts: 37 ✭✭
    edited July 15, 2021 1:04PM

    @ColonelJessup said:
    I'm not crazy about the imaging. In some imagined angles it's too bright or too dark(ish).

    The coming question is purely rhetorical. There are no good numismatic answers, only psychological and spiritual reasons.
    Cogitate, perseverate, meditate, reflect. If you only have two perspectives, rinse and repeat. Based on any number of threads expressing a concern for values, consider: What value could be assigned if one agreed with PCGS MS64 CAC?

    @ColonelJessup...Yeah-I'm not so good with the camera- here's a few more. The bit of research I've done is these are a a beast to really judge/grade.


  • @ricko said:
    Looks like my initial assessment is in error. Went to my good computer and looked at the images again. I see now what others have commented on. Cheers, RickO

    @ricko- My thought were the same as yours when I first received the coin. :-)

  • ColonelJessupColonelJessup Posts: 6,377 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 11:14AM

    Even your limited imaging skills cannot sully its apperception. I can't imagine a better MS64 of the date!

    Local curmudgeon. Formerly a partially-blind world-class trader and grader.
  • @MrEureka said:
    My opinion is that it's an early strike, and that no actual proofs were ever struck. Until somewhat recently, I would have said it was really just a guess, based on the fact that the dies remained in use for an apparently long production run. Today, based on studying the 1922 "Medium Relief" Peace Dollars auctioned by Stacks Bowers at the 2014 ANA, I'm more confident of my opinion.

    The two pieces below are the first and the last (3200th) coins from the dies. The first is "hammered", has lots of die polish lines, and (although not obvious in the pics) is as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen. The 3200th coin, the last struck before the dies were retired (or failed) looks completely ordinary. Now, one could argue that maybe the first piece was struck as a proof and the last piece was not, but I think that's highly unlikely. Mostly, because this was an experimental production run, with the purpose of testing things like the striking pressue and die longevity. Striking a true proof from these dies would have jeopardized the integrity of the experiment.


    @Mr Eureka-Thank you for the feedback!

  • bramn8rbramn8r Posts: 250 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So, where did you get it? What did they tell you it was?

  • ChrisH821ChrisH821 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have never seen one as well struck as that one. Amazing!
    WHERE did you find such a specimen???

    Paging @Peace_dollar88 as he would very much enjoy seeing this one.

    Collector, occasional seller

  • Peace_dollar88Peace_dollar88 Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks for the tag @ChrisH821! Stunning coin for sure. At minimum a vam 1h. The polish lines are obvious and the strike is superb. Would love to hear the story on this one.

  • markelman1125markelman1125 Posts: 1,721 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yea something looks different with this peace, the surface looks Matt and unusually vary smooth. If you think it’s a proof it’s a good idea to get it graded. Because if the grade comes back in proof that’s at least tens of thousands of dollars in value. Lots of $$

  • braddickbraddick Posts: 19,563 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I know it's NOT- yet it sure looks like a Moonlight Mint creation!
    So well-struck- unseen before now.

    Definitely worth a walk-through with PCGS. I, too, would love to know the story
    behind this one. Simply amazing.

    peacockcoins

  • 1northcoin1northcoin Posts: 2,016 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Here is my post from the below linked 2017 thread on the topic of whether there are or are not 1921 Proof Peach Dollars.

    Lots of interesting commentary and photos of 1921s worth revisiting.

    My post in response to RogerB:

    @RogerB said:
    There are sandblast proof 1921 and satin proof 1921,
    Sandblast proof 1922 HR, and
    Sandblast proof 1922 MR; then
    1922 sandblast low relief.

    I recall reading something like that from the 3rd Edition (2016) of "The Red Book" "A Guide Book of Peace Dollars." :)

    FWIW, in response to the OP's 2002 original question, I have had a 1921 satin proof for a number of years that was sold to me as such. I never bothered having it sent to PCGS as at the time I acquired it PCGS apparently was not certifying them. Maybe they still aren't? In any event I grabbed a copy of the 3rd Edition of Roger's book that came out last year as evidence that such an animal does exist.

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/128785/proof-peace-dollars/p1

  • 1northcoin1northcoin Posts: 2,016 ✭✭✭✭✭

    OK, 1921 Peace Dollars, not ""Peach Dollars."

    Would go back and edit the typo, but from past experience there is a 90% chance that will wipe out the entire post.

    FWIW, I still have the referenced coin and still not sure whether PCGS is finally certifying any 1921 Peace Dollars as a Satin Proof.

  • IkesTIkesT Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭

    @MrEureka said:
    My opinion is that it's an early strike, and that no actual proofs were ever struck. Until somewhat recently, I would have said it was really just a guess, based on the fact that the dies remained in use for an apparently long production run. Today, based on studying the 1922 "Medium Relief" Peace Dollars auctioned by Stacks Bowers at the 2014 ANA, I'm more confident of my opinion.

    The two pieces below are the first and the last (3200th) coins from the dies. The first is "hammered", has lots of die polish lines, and (although not obvious in the pics) is as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen. The 3200th coin, the last struck before the dies were retired (or failed) looks completely ordinary. Now, one could argue that maybe the first piece was struck as a proof and the last piece was not, but I think that's highly unlikely. Mostly, because this was an experimental production run, with the purpose of testing things like the striking pressue and die longevity. Striking a true proof from these dies would have jeopardized the integrity of the experiment.

    I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. If they were experimenting with striking pressure, and adjusted it high enough to strike a coin that looks as hammered as a proof, it seems reasonable that they may have intentionally struck a few proofs. When such a coin with an exceptional strike is "as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen", that also seems to suggest a proof strike.

  • @1northcoin said:
    Here is my post from the below linked 2017 thread on the topic of whether there are or are not 1921 Proof Peach Dollars.

    Lots of interesting commentary and photos of 1921s worth revisiting.

    My post in response to RogerB:

    @RogerB said:
    There are sandblast proof 1921 and satin proof 1921,
    Sandblast proof 1922 HR, and
    Sandblast proof 1922 MR; then
    1922 sandblast low relief.

    I recall reading something like that from the 3rd Edition (2016) of "The Red Book" "A Guide Book of Peace Dollars." :)

    FWIW, in response to the OP's 2002 original question, I have had a 1921 satin proof for a number of years that was sold to me as such. I never bothered having it sent to PCGS as at the time I acquired it PCGS apparently was not certifying them. Maybe they still aren't? In any event I grabbed a copy of the 3rd Edition of Roger's book that came out last year as evidence that such an animal does exist.

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/128785/proof-peace-dollars/p1

    @1northcoin-Thank you-A very interesting thread and seems almost like this one.

  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 22,959 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @IkesT said:

    @MrEureka said:
    My opinion is that it's an early strike, and that no actual proofs were ever struck. Until somewhat recently, I would have said it was really just a guess, based on the fact that the dies remained in use for an apparently long production run. Today, based on studying the 1922 "Medium Relief" Peace Dollars auctioned by Stacks Bowers at the 2014 ANA, I'm more confident of my opinion.

    The two pieces below are the first and the last (3200th) coins from the dies. The first is "hammered", has lots of die polish lines, and (although not obvious in the pics) is as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen. The 3200th coin, the last struck before the dies were retired (or failed) looks completely ordinary. Now, one could argue that maybe the first piece was struck as a proof and the last piece was not, but I think that's highly unlikely. Mostly, because this was an experimental production run, with the purpose of testing things like the striking pressue and die longevity. Striking a true proof from these dies would have jeopardized the integrity of the experiment.

    I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. If they were experimenting with striking pressure, and adjusted it high enough to strike a coin that looks as hammered as a proof, it seems reasonable that they may have intentionally struck a few proofs. When such a coin with an exceptional strike is "as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen", that also seems to suggest a proof strike.

    The experiment was the entire production run. A slightly modified design and, presumably, a distinct die pressure setting. The purpose was to get coins that were better struck than with the 1921, and to increase die longevity. (As can be seen from the two pieces I posted, the experiment was an utter failure.) So, to answer your question, striking proofs from experimental dies before the trial run began would have put the dies under unusually high pressure, which could easily have shortened the life of the dies, and which would therefore invalidate the results of the experiment.

    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • TreashuntTreashunt Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Amazing coin, great discussion.

    Frank

    BHNC #203

  • FloridafacelifterFloridafacelifter Posts: 239 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Lovely coin- any specific plan for it? Submission for encapsulation?

  • @Floridafacelifter said:
    Lovely coin- any specific plan for it? Submission for encapsulation?

    @Floridafacelifter -Thank you-I have submitted the coin and will share the results. I went with ANACS.
    Here they are great with VAMS.

  • AMRCAMRC Posts: 4,189 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Details Grade.

    MLA
    eBay
    Collectors Corner
    MLA Facebook
    Numismatics: "The greatest hobby in the world!"
  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 6,140 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2021 10:54AM

    I am not too sure how the mint experimenting with pressure on one die rules this OP coin out as a proof. Too much has to be read into and assumed to do so. Also, sometimes coins struck to certain standards have proof characteristics and may be generally considered as such by many. I am not pronouncing an opinion on the OP coin but note it does seem to show some non-standard (for bog currency) traits.
    If an individual or two decide that a proof must have ALL of their set of standards to be determined as proof then they may fail those standard(s).
    I have encountered that with specimen and proof strikes of British minor silver and copper-nickel and nickel coins in the 1937-1960 period.

    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • ChrisH821ChrisH821 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2021 11:34AM

    Send that coin to PCGS or NGC.
    Or sell it to me ;)
    What did ANACS grade it? Nevermind, I just can't read apparently :)

    Collector, occasional seller

  • dcarrdcarr Posts: 6,353 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MrEureka said:

    @IkesT said:

    @MrEureka said:
    My opinion is that it's an early strike, and that no actual proofs were ever struck. Until somewhat recently, I would have said it was really just a guess, based on the fact that the dies remained in use for an apparently long production run. Today, based on studying the 1922 "Medium Relief" Peace Dollars auctioned by Stacks Bowers at the 2014 ANA, I'm more confident of my opinion.

    The two pieces below are the first and the last (3200th) coins from the dies. The first is "hammered", has lots of die polish lines, and (although not obvious in the pics) is as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen. The 3200th coin, the last struck before the dies were retired (or failed) looks completely ordinary. Now, one could argue that maybe the first piece was struck as a proof and the last piece was not, but I think that's highly unlikely. Mostly, because this was an experimental production run, with the purpose of testing things like the striking pressue and die longevity. Striking a true proof from these dies would have jeopardized the integrity of the experiment.

    I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. If they were experimenting with striking pressure, and adjusted it high enough to strike a coin that looks as hammered as a proof, it seems reasonable that they may have intentionally struck a few proofs. When such a coin with an exceptional strike is "as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen", that also seems to suggest a proof strike.

    The experiment was the entire production run. A slightly modified design and, presumably, a distinct die pressure setting. The purpose was to get coins that were better struck than with the 1921, and to increase die longevity. (As can be seen from the two pieces I posted, the experiment was an utter failure.) So, to answer your question, striking proofs from experimental dies before the trial run began would have put the dies under unusually high pressure, which could easily have shortened the life of the dies, and which would therefore invalidate the results of the experiment.

    From my experience in minting, if a die is subjected to a high-tonnage striking early in its life, that does not appear to have any shortening effect on the useful life of the die (provided that the die survives the high-tonnage striking without cracking or significant deformation).

    Note that my typical die steel (A2) is similar to, but not completely identical to, what the US Mint was using in the early 1920s.

  • dcarrdcarr Posts: 6,353 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1northcoin said:
    Here is my post from the below linked 2017 thread on the topic of whether there are or are not 1921 Proof Peach Dollars.

    Lots of interesting commentary and photos of 1921s worth revisiting.

    My post in response to RogerB:

    @RogerB said:
    There are sandblast proof 1921 and satin proof 1921,
    Sandblast proof 1922 HR, and
    Sandblast proof 1922 MR; then
    1922 sandblast low relief.

    I recall reading something like that from the 3rd Edition (2016) of "The Red Book" "A Guide Book of Peace Dollars." :)

    FWIW, in response to the OP's 2002 original question, I have had a 1921 satin proof for a number of years that was sold to me as such. I never bothered having it sent to PCGS as at the time I acquired it PCGS apparently was not certifying them. Maybe they still aren't? In any event I grabbed a copy of the 3rd Edition of Roger's book that came out last year as evidence that such an animal does exist.

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/128785/proof-peace-dollars/p1

    There is also at least one certified 1922 low-relief brilliant-satin proof.

  • IkesTIkesT Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭

    @MrEureka said:

    @IkesT said:

    @MrEureka said:
    My opinion is that it's an early strike, and that no actual proofs were ever struck. Until somewhat recently, I would have said it was really just a guess, based on the fact that the dies remained in use for an apparently long production run. Today, based on studying the 1922 "Medium Relief" Peace Dollars auctioned by Stacks Bowers at the 2014 ANA, I'm more confident of my opinion.

    The two pieces below are the first and the last (3200th) coins from the dies. The first is "hammered", has lots of die polish lines, and (although not obvious in the pics) is as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen. The 3200th coin, the last struck before the dies were retired (or failed) looks completely ordinary. Now, one could argue that maybe the first piece was struck as a proof and the last piece was not, but I think that's highly unlikely. Mostly, because this was an experimental production run, with the purpose of testing things like the striking pressue and die longevity. Striking a true proof from these dies would have jeopardized the integrity of the experiment.

    I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. If they were experimenting with striking pressure, and adjusted it high enough to strike a coin that looks as hammered as a proof, it seems reasonable that they may have intentionally struck a few proofs. When such a coin with an exceptional strike is "as satiny PL/PR as any Peace Dollar anyone has ever seen", that also seems to suggest a proof strike.

    The experiment was the entire production run. A slightly modified design and, presumably, a distinct die pressure setting. The purpose was to get coins that were better struck than with the 1921, and to increase die longevity. (As can be seen from the two pieces I posted, the experiment was an utter failure.) So, to answer your question, striking proofs from experimental dies before the trial run began would have put the dies under unusually high pressure, which could easily have shortened the life of the dies, and which would therefore invalidate the results of the experiment.

    Hard to speculate about whether the mint would have had this concern a century ago, but as @dcarr reported, striking proofs would not necessarily have a deleterious effect on the dies.

    A "slightly modified design"? We ought not to describe them in this way. This is one of my pet peeves, and one of the reasons why patterns may be underappreciated by the collecting public. In the context of many patterns, and certainly in this case, a "slightly modified design" is, in reality, a completely different design that simply resembles the regular design. The reverse is the pattern design shared by the 1922 high relief proofs. The obverse is a design unique to Judd 2020. I would think it would be human nature for the engraver who labored to make these dies to want to strike proofs with them, particularly when other 1922 varieties were also issued as proofs.

    It's not impossible that a few medium relief coins turned out prooflike just because they were early strikes, but is it likely? I see no particular evidence that would lead me to be confident that this had happened. The last coin of the production run lacks the prooflike attributes, yes, but isn't that what you'd expect under any scenario where the dies were not continuously maintained as proof dies? The final coin provides insight on die life, but I don't see that it provides any information on the early coins that were struck, or indeed whether or not proofs were struck.

This discussion has been closed.