Home U.S. Coin Forum

Grant Vs. Grant with Star

DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

In the 50 Coin Commemorative Type Registry Set should more weight be given to the Grant with star?

Grant Vs. Grant with Star

Sign in to vote!
This is a public poll: others will see what you voted for.

Comments

  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    I can see the case for an added bonus

    m

    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • Namvet69Namvet69 Posts: 8,664 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    Given the limitations, gotta go with the star. 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

  • pcgscacgoldpcgscacgold Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

  • JW77JW77 Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    so to change directions slightly, why in the CAC 50 silver commemorative set is the 1982 Columbian excluded from the set, whereas you need the 1983 Columbian to complete the set. It's the only coin/year that is specifically excluded, either in the regular or CAC set. What possibly could the rationale for this be?

  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @pcgscacgold said:
    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

    I think you are referring to gold commemoratives with CACs.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 351

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 445

    Silver CAC commemoratives.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 334

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 86

  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BillJones said:
    The idea behind the 50 coin type set is that you collect one example of each design. The idea is not to collect the scarcer or scarcest variety or date and mint mark combination, unless you personally decide to make that your goal. Other collectors should not be required to follow your lead.

    If you gave extra credit for the Grant Star half dollar, then you would also need to give extra credit for the lowest mintage Oregon Trail and so on.

    Exactly! Right now there are 61 collectors that have completed this set with a set rating of 64 or better. Shouldn't we have the option of whether we spend our money on a lower graded more scarce coin or a higher grade more common coin. I picked the Grant with star as an extreme example. Do I buy a MS 64 Grant with star instead of a MS 65/66 Grant or do I put the extra money towards a MS65 Hawaiian instead of a MS64?

  • shishshish Posts: 1,104 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    Unfortunately our host has proven to be very resistant to modifying registry weights. Has anyone seen or been successful in facilitating a change to the registry weights for any series? I might be wrong, but it appears that the registry weights for the series I collect have never changed despite several attempts.

    I understand that this is not a high priority, however it would be an easy way to make a significant improvement in the registry.

    Liberty Seated and Trade Dollar Specialist
  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JW77 said:
    so to change directions slightly, why in the CAC 50 silver commemorative set is the 1982 Columbian excluded from the set, whereas you need the 1983 Columbian to complete the set. It's the only coin/year that is specifically excluded, either in the regular or CAC set. What possibly could the rationale for this be?

    Not quite sure of your question. I believe one can use either the 1892 or 1893 in the sets.

  • JW77JW77 Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    @DisneyFan said:

    @JW77 said:
    so to change directions slightly, why in the CAC 50 silver commemorative set is the 1982 Columbian excluded from the set, whereas you need the 1983 Columbian to complete the set. It's the only coin/year that is specifically excluded, either in the regular or CAC set. What possibly could the rationale for this be?

    Not quite sure of your question. I believe one can use either the 1892 or 1893 in the sets.

    Copied this from the 50 Silver Commem CAC composition:

    COLUMBIAN 50C (1893 Only)

    so the 1892 does not qualify, you must use the 1893 to complete the CAC set

  • WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,953 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 13, 2022 11:49AM
    More weigth for Grant with star

    ATS, in the one per date category (Not sure about type sets, as I don't participate there), they reward you with more points, when you select a rarer example of a particular date. I believe type sets (and OPD sets) should work the same way here. I like that concept. It gives the participant the incentive to add better dates. This will help the collector, in the long run, too, as it gives his/her set a higher equity or value.

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • pcgscacgoldpcgscacgold Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:
    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

    I think you are referring to gold commemoratives with CACs.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 351

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 445

    Silver CAC commemoratives.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 334

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 86

    You are correct. I only live in a gold world. I misread this as gold commemorative and saw star no star. Sorry for the confusion I caused.

  • JW77JW77 Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    all is good, if anything my fault for deviating off of Grant to Columbian

  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JW77 said:
    all is good, if anything my fault for deviating off of Grant to Columbian

    Not an issue. I've e-mailed PCGS with your question. Will post the answer.

  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @pcgscacgold said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:
    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

    I think you are referring to gold commemoratives with CACs.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 351

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 445

    Silver CAC commemoratives.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 334

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 86

    You are correct. I only live in a gold world. I misread this as gold commemorative and saw star no star. Sorry for the confusion I caused.

    There may be some good values in gold commemoratives right now. They have come down quite a bit. I think it's worthwhile checking them out - especially the Grant no star.

  • pcgscacgoldpcgscacgold Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:
    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

    I think you are referring to gold commemoratives with CACs.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 351

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 445

    Silver CAC commemoratives.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 334

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 86

    You are correct. I only live in a gold world. I misread this as gold commemorative and saw star no star. Sorry for the confusion I caused.

    There may be some good values in gold commemoratives right now. They have come down quite a bit. I think it's worthwhile checking them out - especially the Grant no star.

    Thanks. I will check those out. I really like the designs on the gold commemoratives. I wish they did $5s and $10s back then.

  • pcgscacgoldpcgscacgold Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    @Justacommeman said:

    @pcgscacgold said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @pcgscacgold said:
    I will go with equal weight. I do not own either, but hope to some day. Population reports at PCGS show very similar numbers with the star type having more MS graded coins. Rarity is the same for both issues. CAC has stickered more with a star. From a population stand point the no star appears a little more rare to find.

    I think you are referring to gold commemoratives with CACs.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 351

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 445

    Silver CAC commemoratives.

    1922 Grant Total Populations 334

    1922 Grant Star Total Populations 86

    You are correct. I only live in a gold world. I misread this as gold commemorative and saw star no star. Sorry for the confusion I caused.

    There may be some good values in gold commemoratives right now. They have come down quite a bit. I think it's worthwhile checking them out - especially the Grant no star.

    Thanks. I will check those out. I really like the designs on the gold commemoratives. I wish they did $5s and $10s back then.

    I love these little gold Grants. They can be balls of fire

    Those look great. Someday.....

  • BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,729 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    With a star, of course.....

    ..... but only 'cuz I got one:

    image

  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,473 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    Okay, I have an 1838-D half eagle in MS63 in my gold coin type set because that’s the highest grade Classic Head half eagle I have. I don’t know the points, but should I be ahead of a person who has an MS-64 or 64+? I don’t think so, and I would benefit if the system allowed it. That’s not what type collecting is about.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • winestevenwinesteven Posts: 4,045 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    @DisneyFan , you raise an interesting point. I mention the following because it’s on point, but please ladies and gentlemen, let’s not take this in a different direction. Let’s stick with the concept of the op.

    Because of this theoretical dilemma with how our host has chosen to weight coins when there are choices for the same slot, according to JA, it sounds like CAC will be starting their own Registry late this year or early next year, where they will indeed give greater weight to tougher dates when slots allow date and/or mint mark choices!

    Steve

    A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!

    My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BillJones said:
    Okay, I have an 1838-D half eagle in MS63 in my gold coin type set because that’s the highest grade Classic Head half eagle I have. I don’t know the points, but should I be ahead of a person who has an MS-64 or 64+? I don’t think so, and I would benefit if the system allowed it. That’s not what type collecting is about.

    Couldn't there be room for both philosophies in the case of the 50 silver commemorative type coins - the largest group of type coins? One registry type set for the highest condition coins and another for the highest rarities?

  • DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JW77 said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @JW77 said:
    so to change directions slightly, why in the CAC 50 silver commemorative set is the 1982 Columbian excluded from the set, whereas you need the 1983 Columbian to complete the set. It's the only coin/year that is specifically excluded, either in the regular or CAC set. What possibly could the rationale for this be?

    Not quite sure of your question. I believe one can use either the 1892 or 1893 in the sets.

    Copied this from the 50 Silver Commem CAC composition:

    COLUMBIAN 50C (1893 Only)

    so the 1892 does not qualify, you must use the 1893 to complete the CAC set

    I sent your question to:

    setregistry@collectors.com

    L. Emilio Gutierrez is now the Set Registry Coordinator and he quickly agreed the 1892 Columbian should be eligible for the set and the title now reads as, "Silver Commemoratives 50 Piece Type Set, Circulation Strikes (1892-1954)." : )

    Nice catch!

    P.S. This CAC set has really caught on. There are already 32 participants!

  • JW77JW77 Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Equal weight

    @DisneyFan said:

    @JW77 said:

    @DisneyFan said:

    @JW77 said:
    so to change directions slightly, why in the CAC 50 silver commemorative set is the 1982 Columbian excluded from the set, whereas you need the 1983 Columbian to complete the set. It's the only coin/year that is specifically excluded, either in the regular or CAC set. What possibly could the rationale for this be?

    Not quite sure of your question. I believe one can use either the 1892 or 1893 in the sets.

    Copied this from the 50 Silver Commem CAC composition:

    COLUMBIAN 50C (1893 Only)

    so the 1892 does not qualify, you must use the 1893 to complete the CAC set

    I sent your question to:

    setregistry@collectors.com

    L. Emilio Gutierrez is now the Set Registry Coordinator and he quickly agreed the 1892 Columbian should be eligible for the set and the title now reads as, "Silver Commemoratives 50 Piece Type Set, Circulation Strikes (1892-1954)." : )

    Nice catch!

    P.S. This CAC set has really caught on. There are already 32 participants!

    That is awesome...thanks for following through on this Disneyfan!

  • winestevenwinesteven Posts: 4,045 ✭✭✭✭✭
    More weigth for Grant with star

    @DisneyFan said:

    …..This CAC set has really caught on. There are already 32 participants!

    And it’s the ONLY set where my set is ranked higher than the set by D. L. Hansen (at least for the moment, lol).

    Steve

    A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!

    My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file