Home U.S. Coin Forum

1909 VDB MATTE PROOF LINCOLN with an unusual label?

BUFFNIXXBUFFNIXX Posts: 2,680 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited October 3, 2022 9:54AM in U.S. Coin Forum

Here is a 1909 vdb matte proof Lincoln cent that mentions "UNC detail" when calling a coin "PR"
shouldn't this logically be "PROOF detail" or "PR detail" rather than "UNC detail"? Methinks the current
label should be changed. The terms proof and unc do not mix well together, denoting two different
methods of manufacture.


Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"

Comments

  • MarkInDavisMarkInDavis Posts: 1,689 ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2022 9:58AM

    Unc details implies it would grade PR60 or better if not for the cleaning. PR details would say nothing. Could be PR10 or PR6?.

    image Respectfully, Mark
  • Namvet69Namvet69 Posts: 8,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just maybe the PR is the error and it should be PL. I'll watch for more insightful replies. Peace Roy

    BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, Ricko, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, Jzyskowski1, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,483 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The label is correct.

    Proofs can grade under 60 so the UNC describes the grade it would get if it was numerically graded. Below 60 would be PR AU Details and so on.

    If you used PR PR Details than a coin that would grade PR10 and one at PR60 would be the same.

  • robecrobec Posts: 6,378 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is definitely a proof. All the diagnostics are there.

  • commoncents05commoncents05 Posts: 10,077 ✭✭✭

    Uncirculated means it shows no wear, not that it is a business strike coin. Mint State is the terminology used for business strike coins. I see no issue with the label.

    I agree with robec's opinion, it is definitely a proof.

    -Paul

    Many Quality coins for sale at http://www.CommonCentsRareCoins.com
  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @robec said:
    It is definitely a proof. All the diagnostics are there.

    not to stir the pot but there are a LOT of coins out there struck from proof dies with exact diagnostics that don't merit the PR, SP etc designation.

    the flans require special preparation and striking to be labeled as SP, PR, etc. so it takes more than just diagnostics. (unfortunately for us, especially with impaired coins)

    i know you know all this but for posterity and all.

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,483 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC

    PCGS called it a proof, so if it’s not a proof the buyer is covered by the PCGS Guarantee.

  • robecrobec Posts: 6,378 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:

    @robec said:
    It is definitely a proof. All the diagnostics are there.

    not to stir the pot but there are a LOT of coins out there struck from proof dies with exact diagnostics that don't merit the PR, SP etc designation.

    the flans require special preparation and striking to be labeled as SP, PR, etc. so it takes more than just diagnostics. (unfortunately for us, especially with impaired coins)

    i know you know all this but for posterity and all.

    Show me one with all the obverse and reverse diagnostics. You “might” and I say that very loosely find one with an obverse or a reverse but the odds of finding a VDB business strike struck from MPL Obv die #1 and Rev die#1 are longer than winning the lottery.

  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @FlyingAl said:
    @LanceNewmanOCC

    PCGS called it a proof, so if it’s not a proof the buyer is covered by the PCGS Guarantee.

    .
    i wasn't necessarily saying the coin in the OP isn't a proof but the thought did go through my mind because of the details part.

    does the guarantee still cover detail coins? what the tpgs back and don't any more has changed a fair bit over the past several years. although this isn't part of the intent of my post to this thread. :)

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • robecrobec Posts: 6,378 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:

    @FlyingAl said:
    @LanceNewmanOCC

    PCGS called it a proof, so if it’s not a proof the buyer is covered by the PCGS Guarantee.

    .
    i wasn't necessarily saying the coin in the OP isn't a proof but the thought did go through my mind because of the details part.

    does the guarantee still cover detail coins? what the tpgs back and don't any more has changed a fair bit over the past several years. although this isn't part of the intent of my post to this thread. :)

    I do know of one date in particular that has been found with obverse markings. I’ve seen a few 1916’s with all the proof diagnostics around the date.

    Good question on the guarantee. I would think so but don’t know for sure.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Looks like a proof coin to me.... I have no issue with the label as is. Cheers, RickO

  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BUFFNIXX said:
    Here is a 1909 vdb matte proof Lincoln cent that mentions "UNC detail" when calling a coin "PR"
    shouldn't this logically be "PROOF detail" or "PR detail" rather than "UNC detail"? Methinks the current
    label should be changed. The terms proof and unc do not mix well together, denoting two different
    methods of manufacture.

    .
    you are technically correct about the method of manufacture and the terminology for it and when/where it is either applicable or most applicable.

    there is a specific designation for circulated PR/SP or whatever, being called, impaired aka circ., so having a specific term(s) for PR/SP or whatever specifying uncirculated (while being PR/SP does specify a method of manufacture, does NOT specify that it is still in fact legal tender and spendable aka circulatable and subject to terminology specifying UNC or CIRC) but detailed w/o using the term UNC, may have a place in the future.

    i'm not coming up with anything for a possible term (anyone for some suggestions?) for PR/SP or whatever that has not been circulated but gets away from the method of manufacture vernacular of UNC for detailed (not-gradable) coins/medals/tokens etc.

    it would perhaps have a more professional/accurate "feel" to it not to have PR and UNC on the same label 99% of the time. (not 100% as i can't think of every instance possible and the <1% time where we may need even a further specification)

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

Leave a Comment

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