1955 (box) proof set.

duck620

will the price change by putting this 1955 proof set into a plastic holder?

ajaan

Don't know about price, but if I was looking for one I would like it as it is.

hummingbird_coins

I would pay more for one in OGP as a testament to its originality - the main factor being if it were an online purchase, there would be less chance of hidden hairlines from previous handling.

MFeld

Some potential buyers wouldn’t be as interested or pay as much if the coins are removed from their original packaging. However, if you bought it, what was your motivation in doing so?

..

@MFeld said:
Some potential buyers wouldn’t be as interested or pay as much if the coins are removed from their original packaging. However, if you bought it, what was your motivation in doing so?

Mark….does this look like the OGP? I have a few older boxed proof sets where the cellophane coin packets were replaced with a flimsy plastic baggy type packets……kinda ruined the ‘originality’ for me. These look like that baggy type as the cellophane packets are really shiny.

MFeld

@knovak1976 said:

@MFeld said:
Some potential buyers wouldn’t be as interested or pay as much if the coins are removed from their original packaging. However, if you bought it, what was your motivation in doing so?

Mark….does this look like the OGP? I have a few older boxed proof sets where the cellophane coin packets were replaced with a flimsy plastic baggy type packets……kinda ruined the ‘originality’ for me. These look like that baggy type as the cellophane packets are really shiny.

That’s a good point that you raised. I was focused on the box and the matched appearance of the quarter and half dollar. While I’m not certain, I might have jumped the gun or spoken too broadly in using the term “original packaging”.

hummingbird_coins

@knovak1976 said:

@MFeld said:
Some potential buyers wouldn’t be as interested or pay as much if the coins are removed from their original packaging. However, if you bought it, what was your motivation in doing so?

Mark….does this look like the OGP? I have a few older boxed proof sets where the cellophane coin packets were replaced with a flimsy plastic baggy type packets……kinda ruined the ‘originality’ for me. These look like that baggy type as the cellophane packets are really shiny.

In another thread, it was suggested that some collectors at the time moved the coins from the OGP into archival sleeves once they noticed they were starting to tone. That is probably the case here, too.

..

@hummingbird_coins said:
……….

……
In another thread, it was suggested that some collectors at the time moved the coins from the OGP into archival sleeves once they noticed they were starting to tone. That is probably the case here, too.

Do you feel this takes away from the “originality” of the set? When I got my first boxed set with the flimsy packets my first thought was that the packets didn’t protect the coins as well, but also that the new staple was a dead giveaway too….. Cheers, karl

tincup

My concept of 'original' for these have been of course the box; the stapled cellophane sleeves, and the tissue wrap. The stapled cellophane has always been the main indication for me; but of course these old original coins could have issues due to the brittle cellophane, rusted staples, etc.

tincup

So the Op's coins to me.... are likely from an original set due to the appeared matched look, but appear to be transferred to different sleeves as mentioned. All depends on your definition of 'original'.

jfriedm56

We talked about original proof sets and original uncirculated mint sets in another post, so for those of you who are unfamiliar with original 1955 proof sets, they did come with these flimsy soft plastic sleeves that year. And for some reason in late 1954 proof sets, I’ve been told, though never actually seen one. If for any reason one would find them on earlier sets before 1954, they would not be original to the set. They would have been removed from the original sleeves and replaced by the soft plastic sleeves. And to the OPs question yes. Keep it in the original packaging, but knowing that these soft sleeves tone the coins darker over time.

Meltdown

Here's my 54 set with the box and in similar plastic with the newer staple. So this would be a "late" 1954 set?

duck620

Thanks everyone for your comments my question has been answered (leave in original packaging)

dsessom

@Meltdown THAT is one gorgeous 1954 Franklin! That purple toning is so pretty!

jfriedm56

@Meltdown said:
Here's my 54 set with the box and in similar plastic with the newer staple. So this would be a "late" 1954 set?

From what I’ve heard and seen, IMO, I would say yes.

jfriedm56

Again, here is a 1950 original proof set with cellophane sleeves that all 1950-1953 sets were housed in and half a year of 1954 sets.

Copperindian

A question that may be a bit off topic: why were there both boxed & flat pack proof sets issued in 1955? To my knowledge, this was unique to that year. Which of the two were more common?
To the OP: nice set! I would keep it as is too.

BillJones

The 1955 box Proof sets are often ugly because the plastic in the sleeves was not good for the coins. The set you bought appears to really nice, which is unusual. It’s the sort of thing I’ve thought about buying if I could find a nice one.

The irony is you will enjoy the set more if you put it in a Capital Plastics holder. My 1953 set was in the box, but the cellophane envelopes went bad and the coins would not stay in them. I had to put the set in a holder. The great thing is that the coins are original and never dipped.

Here is a 1955 flat pack set. These sets have traditionally sold for a little more.

johnny9434

@Meltdown said:
Here's my 54 set with the box and in similar plastic with the newer staple. So this would be a "late" 1954 set?

Love the blueish look to some of the coins 👍

BLUEJAYWAY

Keep it original.