1971 over 1951 year.
DieHardWithVengence
Posts: 70 ✭
From 1951-1961, the 9 remained the relatively similar in shape and stature, however in 1971 the 9 took a different form. I believe that the 9 and the 7 were re-punched on this coin to cover the old 9 and the 5 & I believe this to be the case with this coin because on the obverse, I noticed the remnants of a worn 5 under the 7 and the “G” in the word GOD in 1951 & 1971 was the same, however in 1961 had changed design. Also, there is visible doubling on several obverse words, most notably in “STATES,” “OF,” and “AMERICA,” as well as an added feather on the far left of the Eagle’s tail.
2
Comments
Well, those pics did not load in the order I wanted.. my bad for the confusion on comparison folks..
I am no expert but if this is true it would be an incredible discovery! Unnoticed by the entire numismatic community for over 50 years. You have a keen eye my friend. I look forward to seeing what other members opine.
The doubling is machine doubling and around the seven it appears to be die chips or gouges. Very good pictures. Cheers, RickO
Machine doubling.
No "5". Pareidolia.
Or he knows better, but is having his jollies.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Saying I think the 9 might look like an old font, or some random marks might be a 5 is hardly proof. If you aren't a error expert, which your previous post clearly indicates, you need to have this claim attributed by a TPG, or experts such as Mike Byers or Jon Sullivan.
You were told what you needed to do this with your previous "discovery". WHY DIDNT YOU FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS this time? Why aren't you showing us how the fonts are an EXACT MATCH? Do you consider yourself more knowledgeable than the TPG authenticators and error experts on this board?
Keep ignoring the recommendations from members and it will become apparently clear that you're doing nothing but trolling this board. And there is nothing lower than somebody getting their jollies at the expense of of others who are trying to share knowledge and learn.
@DieHardWithVengence "9 and the 7 were re-punched on this coin to cover the old 9 and the 5"
If a 1971 was punched over a 1951 your coin would be silver. Is your coin silver or clad?
Not if it were punched on the die
The OP is having a hard enough time grasping the minting process, no need to add to the confusion for the OP and future readers.
Lol. I really don't think he's trying.
Send it in for grading.... and examination... then you will get your answer.
The sad part is that based on what we've seen from 1971 lately we can't rule it out just because it's absurd.
MD
I would definitely send this in for grading
@Oldhoopster not once did I say “think.” I stated that I “believe.” I posted visual examples of a 1951, 1961 & 1971 quarter with the hopes that you would see the differences with your own visual inspection, but it seems as though you neglected to inspect it. If you think I’m wrong, please refer to my latest post of another ‘71 quarter with underlying dates on it, and maybe then you’ll understand that I see and know more than you assume I do.
Maybe I should be on that board you speak of, it might not hurt to have someone as objective as me to push them to see things from a different perspective and explore new theories on how things are seen on the coinage today.
Also, I never claimed to be the smartest person in the room, but if I keep letting everyone tell me what they “think” they know, I soon will be, as well as having gained insight to understanding how certain people come to certain conclusions. 👍
@ifthevamzarockin after performing a test for silver, I found that both the obverse and reverse sides contained silver, however, when looking at the very worn rim of the coin, I did notice patches of copper and after taking some size and weight measurements found that it was slightly smaller in diameter than a normal quarter from either year. Any idea how that would happen? Is that an indication that it could’ve been another coin from a different production that possibly got into the hopper? Or maybe it was slightly smaller to begin with?
oy!
BHNC #203
EVERYONE of your posts turns contentious. It seems you never like the answers you get and blame other posters, because you want to "learn". You DON'T want to learn, you just want them to agree with you that you see errors everywhere! Please, give it a rest.
Congrats on your incredible silver 7 over 5 find. I can’t wait to see it slabbed and presented to all the non believers! You sir are truly gifted in both your perseverance and just finding this incredible coin!!
Well done!
Please send it in. I recommend the fastest service (yes I know it costs more, but for such an incredible find, it’s worth it). I would also do PCGS as the value of this coin is beyond words. Please post when you get it graded. I recommend Heritage and I’m certain @MFeld would help auction it off, it might get more money than the slabbed PCGS cricket!
U R DI MAN!
My current registry sets:
20th Century Type Set
Virtual DANSCO 7070
Slabbed IHC set - Missing the Anacs Slabbed coins
I am the last person on the forum to discuss doubling.
I go straight to known coins with Pick up Points.
Quit chasing ghosts DHWV
You are wasting time and money.
Sage advice from many that have come before us... Buy certified coins and spend more in the first year on seminars and books than coins.
I heard that twenty years ago and still fight against the tide.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
Don’t feed the troll!
@DieHardWithVengence
My concern is seeing a new collector with access to an incredible amount of numismatic expertise just ignoring the recommendations. You're making multiple EXTRAORDINARY claims that with a small amount of research easily show that are practically an impossibility of happening.
LEARN THE MINTING PROCESS. Then you're "I believe" statements will have a little credibility behind them. Right now, they are nothing more than very poor guesses that you seem to keep doubling down on. Don't forget, you're getting info from some experts that are the equivalent of MIT professors in numismatics, not some guy at the end of the bar with a questionable opinion. These are people who understand the processes and science and the research needed.
BTW. You commented on other 71 over different dates. Spend some time looking up the documented information on how these proof shenanigans (struck over a silver Canadian quarter and barber quarter) likely came into existence. There are a number of accurate threads on this topic where you can easily see that they dont even come close to your claims.
Follow the recommendations and do the studying and research. I just think its a darn shame when a new collector WASTES opportunities because they have a closed mind and/or don't want to bother taking the time to learn. Ultimately it's your loss
@Oldhoopster he is not new, just slick back under a new name again.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
You're probably right. Sometimes you just want to help the new collectors learn and grow like I've been helped over the years. But you sometimes overlook those who may just want to screw with the board or are too lazy to try to learn. Those are truly the worst on boards like this because they do nothing but confuse new collectors who really want to learn and use all of the great resources that we have here.
(Apologies to the board for my ramblings. Been working through some health care issues that are making me grouchy and crotchety. Ill try to stick with numismatics)
I don't think you owe anyone any apologies for your posts ands I hope you will keep them coming.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.