This one arrived today, nothing super special but some cool blue/purple toning on the dime and quarter. The others are either too far gone or too banged up, save the Kennedy.
@Coinscratch said:
This one arrived today, nothing super special but some cool blue/purple toning on the dime and quarter. The others are either too far gone or too banged up, save the Kennedy.
It's hard to tell with this specific kind of tarnish but I think this dollar will clean up and be a keeper.
@Vasanti said:
What are you doing to clean them up?
It depends. Normal tarnish, dark or mottled, I put into dilute dishwashing liquid. White or spotty I soak in 91% alcohol (often with about 30% acetone) for a few days. The ones that aren't OK after detergent go into the alcohol as well.
If these don't work there are a few other steps I use but I don't have many successes with these others.
If coins aren't too far gone it will save most of them except copper.
@Vasanti said:
What are you doing to clean them up?
What should I be doing? I haven't had much luck with soaking in acetone, I mean it takes off some of that white oxidation (like on the nickel) but what you're left with isn't much better. Unless, it's a proof in a quick silver dip I don't mess with it.
@cladking I wish I could shoot images like TrueView does. As you're right this one has very nice surfaces, aside from the hits. but too many hits to really matter.
Here are the two best from the set. Cell pics, although very pixelated give you a better idea of the true color and flash. The dime is out, lustrous but no FB.
I’m looking for 67+ for my Washington set but 66+ wouldn’t hurt my feelings in this case.
@Coinscratch said:
Here are the two best from the set. Cell pics, although very pixelated give you a better idea of the true color and flash. The dime is out, lustrous but no FB.
I’m looking for 67+ for my Washington set but 66+ wouldn’t hurt my feelings in this case.
Very nice coins!
I think the '75-D dime is very underrated. Most 1975 mint sets were broken for the Type I Philly Ike or because the coins were all dark with tarnish. The dime was considered too common to save.
There are lots of the quarters, of course, but well struck high grades are uncommon. They come nice but not often over MS-65.
Cell pics have to be learned as well when buying online. A well toned example may just look like a dark shadow and with only 1 or 2 pics to look at - good luck! Or you may see what you think are hits that are not, as in this case.
This is my pic of the coin and I knew that in-hand was nice but you couldn't tell from this pic that is a 67+. You can however see signs of luster (even though muted) around the device letters. Anytime the letters look detached from the surface its a good bet on luster. And of course that second pic of a slightly different angle will show a different part of the cartwheel.
They've significantly increased their prices on all the Ike sets.
The '73 and '74 are more comparably priced all the time. The '73 set has been destroyed because of the mint set only Ikes but then these coins are saved and more likely to be available today. The '74 set has been neglected and consumed. The Ikes from the '73 set are usually pristine but the '74 Ikes tend to be usually tarnished and there is no huge savings of BU rolls. The '74 is emerging as the toughest Ike set.
Of course the '76 type I ike is very low mintage and very low quality so will always be king in chBU and higher grades. To obtain one a collector has little choice but to cut open a better '75 mint set and hope the tarnish comes off.
The Ikes are getting all the attention but the true scarcity tends to be in the other clads, especially quarters.
I see no signs, very little anecdotal evidence, that sales on these is anything but lackluster. Don't get me wrong there are far more retail buyers than in the old days by a factor of four or five but this is still a remarkably small number. Most dealers retailed fewer than 20 sets a year, mostly around Christmas, back in the days before the internet and eBay. By any measure the demand for these is simply paltry but it is still pushing the prices higher.
So many have been destroyed though intent and neglect that supply is far smaller today. Now that so many dealers are retailing mint sets and singles there appears to be an emerging wholesale market for nice rolls.
I believe that if this demand continues it's current trajectory we'll see the market under extreme stress in the near future. In a sense this has already occurred because so many sets are being retailed. It's no longer so easy to pick up quantities of sets at bid on eBay. So few coin shops stock these coins that most buyers are getting them on-line from retailers and eBay.
Right now there is still some overhang of supply sitting in shops (mostly retailers) and available for sale at the right price so I'm not really expecting an explosive move immediately unless demand increases substantially. This is quite possible with the soaring popularity of coin collecting virtually worldwide and the closeness in which we stay thanks to the internet. With the tiny numbers of sets being sold a huge increase in this number is hardly impossible. Doubling the popularity of mint sets requires only a few thousand new collectors.
This may have already been mentioned, but I keep forgetting exactly which years are the ones that are likely to become the most scarce in the future because of being destroyed for just one coin and/or getting ruined for environmental damage. Is it all the ones before 1990 or is there a certain smaller period like 68 and 69, or some period in the 80s?
@Mr_Spud said:
This may have already been mentioned, but I keep forgetting exactly which years are the ones that are likely to become the most scarce in the future because of being destroyed for just one coin and/or getting ruined for environmental damage. Is it all the ones before 1990 or is there a certain smaller period like 68 and 69, or some period in the 80s?
In the long run it will boil down to specific coins and the most valuable sets will be those with the most valuable coins. Obviously at this point there is a tradeoff between this ultimate scarcity and the odds of the better coins being choice and pristine. For instance the best set (probably) is the '69 because more than half contain a nice chBU Philly quarter. Other coins in this set are also very desirable but a bad set is a bad set and some sets simply have no choice coins in them. Some of the coins will be tough only in very chBU or in Gem. Some coins will be very common even in Gem.
This being said I like the set in this order for the specific coins listed;
'69; ch BU Philly dime and quarter. Very chBU Denver quarter. Gem cents.
'75; chBU type I Ike, Gem dimes.
'68; Gem clad, ch BU Philly cent.
'70; PL half. Gem Philly quarter. chBU sm dt.
'71; chBU Philly quarter and dime. others in Gem
'65; FS. FB. cameo.
'74; All very ch BU except Denver cent and nickel.
'78; pristine ch BU.
'73; all Gems. Ikes in very chBU.
'79; Gem cents. most other Gem.
I like all the dates because they all have something to offer from major varieties to Gems. Only the pre-1981 sets are usually tarnished except the '72 to '74 are not as bad. While most '72 through '74 sets are affected many of the coins in them are not. Those that are affected are usually easy to clean. '81 and later sets have some bad coins but many sets are wholly pristine. I believe these won't fare as well long term but they should be much more stable than the early sets. Many later date clads are hard to find in nice very chBU because they are marked up more badly than early dates. chBU is usually pretty easy but pristine coins and Gems tend to be most uncommon.
I believe it's the coins that are tough in chBU that will see the biggest increases because relatively few will collect sets in Gem.
If these sets get cut up now and cleaned as they should be all the coins will be more common in the future. This is because the longer a coin sits in the packaging and tarnishes the lower the probability it can be cleaned.
My favorite variety is the '68 DDO dime. It is just tough enough (~2.6%) to be interesting and sufficiently available to actually be found. About half of these are already lost or irretrievably tarnished. My favorite Gem is the '69 quarter but the toughest is the '76 type I Ike. The odds of a '69 set having a keeper is higher than other sets. My least favorite date is the '87 but it has some winners in it as well. I have very little experience with the '99 to date sets but I have little doubt they are worthy of attention as well. There are certainly a lot of spectacular Gems in them and some have very low mintages.
Mint sets are not the be all end all of modern circulating coinage collecting but they are a very very important part of it and they are the source of almost all clad issued from 1965 to 1999 other than bicentennial quarters. They are the source of most modern Gems of all denominations. Two mint sets out of three (as issued) contain at least one Gem. With many moderns you'd have been very lucky to find even one Gem in an entire bag (two boxes). These coins were struck by new dies at higher pressure and then more carefully handled. They were struck at lower speeds on older numismatic presses allowing more time to fill the die. In many cases the dies got a little special handling including polishing and/ or basining. Even planchets were sometimes polished.
@cladking
Thank you. I plan on going through my mint sets, especially of the dates you listed, and remove them from the packaging and rinsing off any that need it and putting them in saflips and into mason jars with desiccant to make time capsules for future numismatics to enjoy. I like doing stuff like that.
@Mr_Spud said: @cladking
Thank you. I plan on going through my mint sets, especially of the dates you listed, and remove them from the packaging and rinsing off any that need it and putting them in saflips and into mason jars with desiccant to make time capsules for future numismatics to enjoy. I like doing stuff like that.
The '76 and '77 set also usually are already tarnished. The '66 and '67 are hit and miss and the misses aren't very bad but they also have some issues.
I've said this before but just to be clear I think it is critically important to cut up these older mint sets to save the coins. however, this is not necessarily the best move financially and this especially applies to sets with no nice coins in them that are still pristine. The market for many years held mint sets as having almost no value above face value while the aggregate value of the coins was often substantially higher. Now that the coins tend to be tarnished the less affected sets have large premiums which could grow.
In the long run "every" coin is valued based on its own merits but in the interim nobody knows what the market will do. I made the decision to cut up my sets chiefly based on wanting to save the coins from degradation. I couldn't really sell any of them anyway because I had saved only the gemmiest sets.
This is a complex decision but the '68 to '71 sets are really bad and only going to get worse. I've lost dozens and dozens of really nice pre-1985 Gems. My decision to cut up everything was easier.
Comments
This one arrived today, nothing super special but some cool blue/purple toning on the dime and quarter. The others are either too far gone or too banged up, save the Kennedy.
It's hard to tell with this specific kind of tarnish but I think this dollar will clean up and be a keeper.
Nice set.
What are you doing to clean them up?
It depends. Normal tarnish, dark or mottled, I put into dilute dishwashing liquid. White or spotty I soak in 91% alcohol (often with about 30% acetone) for a few days. The ones that aren't OK after detergent go into the alcohol as well.
If these don't work there are a few other steps I use but I don't have many successes with these others.
If coins aren't too far gone it will save most of them except copper.
What should I be doing? I haven't had much luck with soaking in acetone, I mean it takes off some of that white oxidation (like on the nickel) but what you're left with isn't much better. Unless, it's a proof in a quick silver dip I don't mess with it.
@cladking I wish I could shoot images like TrueView does. As you're right this one has very nice surfaces, aside from the hits. but too many hits to really matter.
Here are the two best from the set. Cell pics, although very pixelated give you a better idea of the true color and flash. The dime is out, lustrous but no FB.
I’m looking for 67+ for my Washington set but 66+ wouldn’t hurt my feelings in this case.
Very nice coins!
I think the '75-D dime is very underrated. Most 1975 mint sets were broken for the Type I Philly Ike or because the coins were all dark with tarnish. The dime was considered too common to save.
There are lots of the quarters, of course, but well struck high grades are uncommon. They come nice but not often over MS-65.
Cell pics have to be learned as well when buying online. A well toned example may just look like a dark shadow and with only 1 or 2 pics to look at - good luck! Or you may see what you think are hits that are not, as in this case.
This is my pic of the coin and I knew that in-hand was nice but you couldn't tell from this pic that is a 67+. You can however see signs of luster (even though muted) around the device letters. Anytime the letters look detached from the surface its a good bet on luster. And of course that second pic of a slightly different angle will show a different part of the cartwheel.
Please see my previous posts on using ammonia on CuNi coins. It works, PM me if you'd like.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Here’s a keeper that the cellophane was hiding so I set it free. For now
Cell pic for true color and flash. Something I have yet to learn on my real camera.
Real camera
Golden Eagle Coins was (is) the last place to get mint set cheaply.
https://www.goldeneaglecoin.com/proof-sets--mint-sets/uncirculated-mint-sets/uncirculated-mint-sets-1959_date
They've significantly increased their prices on all the Ike sets.
The '73 and '74 are more comparably priced all the time. The '73 set has been destroyed because of the mint set only Ikes but then these coins are saved and more likely to be available today. The '74 set has been neglected and consumed. The Ikes from the '73 set are usually pristine but the '74 Ikes tend to be usually tarnished and there is no huge savings of BU rolls. The '74 is emerging as the toughest Ike set.
Of course the '76 type I ike is very low mintage and very low quality so will always be king in chBU and higher grades. To obtain one a collector has little choice but to cut open a better '75 mint set and hope the tarnish comes off.
The Ikes are getting all the attention but the true scarcity tends to be in the other clads, especially quarters.
I see no signs, very little anecdotal evidence, that sales on these is anything but lackluster. Don't get me wrong there are far more retail buyers than in the old days by a factor of four or five but this is still a remarkably small number. Most dealers retailed fewer than 20 sets a year, mostly around Christmas, back in the days before the internet and eBay. By any measure the demand for these is simply paltry but it is still pushing the prices higher.
So many have been destroyed though intent and neglect that supply is far smaller today. Now that so many dealers are retailing mint sets and singles there appears to be an emerging wholesale market for nice rolls.
I believe that if this demand continues it's current trajectory we'll see the market under extreme stress in the near future. In a sense this has already occurred because so many sets are being retailed. It's no longer so easy to pick up quantities of sets at bid on eBay. So few coin shops stock these coins that most buyers are getting them on-line from retailers and eBay.
Right now there is still some overhang of supply sitting in shops (mostly retailers) and available for sale at the right price so I'm not really expecting an explosive move immediately unless demand increases substantially. This is quite possible with the soaring popularity of coin collecting virtually worldwide and the closeness in which we stay thanks to the internet. With the tiny numbers of sets being sold a huge increase in this number is hardly impossible. Doubling the popularity of mint sets requires only a few thousand new collectors.
I think super soakers and beer should not be allowed inside the mint on dress down Fridays.
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, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
Fine! I’ll just stay home on Friday’s.
This may have already been mentioned, but I keep forgetting exactly which years are the ones that are likely to become the most scarce in the future because of being destroyed for just one coin and/or getting ruined for environmental damage. Is it all the ones before 1990 or is there a certain smaller period like 68 and 69, or some period in the 80s?
Mr_Spud
In the long run it will boil down to specific coins and the most valuable sets will be those with the most valuable coins. Obviously at this point there is a tradeoff between this ultimate scarcity and the odds of the better coins being choice and pristine. For instance the best set (probably) is the '69 because more than half contain a nice chBU Philly quarter. Other coins in this set are also very desirable but a bad set is a bad set and some sets simply have no choice coins in them. Some of the coins will be tough only in very chBU or in Gem. Some coins will be very common even in Gem.
This being said I like the set in this order for the specific coins listed;
'69; ch BU Philly dime and quarter. Very chBU Denver quarter. Gem cents.
'75; chBU type I Ike, Gem dimes.
'68; Gem clad, ch BU Philly cent.
'70; PL half. Gem Philly quarter. chBU sm dt.
'71; chBU Philly quarter and dime. others in Gem
'65; FS. FB. cameo.
'74; All very ch BU except Denver cent and nickel.
'78; pristine ch BU.
'73; all Gems. Ikes in very chBU.
'79; Gem cents. most other Gem.
I like all the dates because they all have something to offer from major varieties to Gems. Only the pre-1981 sets are usually tarnished except the '72 to '74 are not as bad. While most '72 through '74 sets are affected many of the coins in them are not. Those that are affected are usually easy to clean. '81 and later sets have some bad coins but many sets are wholly pristine. I believe these won't fare as well long term but they should be much more stable than the early sets. Many later date clads are hard to find in nice very chBU because they are marked up more badly than early dates. chBU is usually pretty easy but pristine coins and Gems tend to be most uncommon.
I believe it's the coins that are tough in chBU that will see the biggest increases because relatively few will collect sets in Gem.
If these sets get cut up now and cleaned as they should be all the coins will be more common in the future. This is because the longer a coin sits in the packaging and tarnishes the lower the probability it can be cleaned.
My favorite variety is the '68 DDO dime. It is just tough enough (~2.6%) to be interesting and sufficiently available to actually be found. About half of these are already lost or irretrievably tarnished. My favorite Gem is the '69 quarter but the toughest is the '76 type I Ike. The odds of a '69 set having a keeper is higher than other sets. My least favorite date is the '87 but it has some winners in it as well. I have very little experience with the '99 to date sets but I have little doubt they are worthy of attention as well. There are certainly a lot of spectacular Gems in them and some have very low mintages.
Mint sets are not the be all end all of modern circulating coinage collecting but they are a very very important part of it and they are the source of almost all clad issued from 1965 to 1999 other than bicentennial quarters. They are the source of most modern Gems of all denominations. Two mint sets out of three (as issued) contain at least one Gem. With many moderns you'd have been very lucky to find even one Gem in an entire bag (two boxes). These coins were struck by new dies at higher pressure and then more carefully handled. They were struck at lower speeds on older numismatic presses allowing more time to fill the die. In many cases the dies got a little special handling including polishing and/ or basining. Even planchets were sometimes polished.
@cladking
Thank you. I plan on going through my mint sets, especially of the dates you listed, and remove them from the packaging and rinsing off any that need it and putting them in saflips and into mason jars with desiccant to make time capsules for future numismatics to enjoy. I like doing stuff like that.
Mr_Spud
The '76 and '77 set also usually are already tarnished. The '66 and '67 are hit and miss and the misses aren't very bad but they also have some issues.
I've said this before but just to be clear I think it is critically important to cut up these older mint sets to save the coins. however, this is not necessarily the best move financially and this especially applies to sets with no nice coins in them that are still pristine. The market for many years held mint sets as having almost no value above face value while the aggregate value of the coins was often substantially higher. Now that the coins tend to be tarnished the less affected sets have large premiums which could grow.
In the long run "every" coin is valued based on its own merits but in the interim nobody knows what the market will do. I made the decision to cut up my sets chiefly based on wanting to save the coins from degradation. I couldn't really sell any of them anyway because I had saved only the gemmiest sets.
This is a complex decision but the '68 to '71 sets are really bad and only going to get worse. I've lost dozens and dozens of really nice pre-1985 Gems. My decision to cut up everything was easier.
I think modern mint sets are becoming more and more modern.
The 69 is harder than I thought, talking about full steps
I think this 83 will go??