What are your thoughts on cameo SMS coinage?

oldcameoproofsguy

There is some hype that cameo SMS coinage is really rare and hard to come by. There is no doubting the beauty of these pieces. Are there hoards of these coins just waiting to be found or do you think that the majority of the SMS coinage has been rummaged through to find those precious CAMs? Which denomination do you feel is the most difficult to come across? Do you feel at current price levels that these coins are a good value? I have my opinions about this but I am curious about yours.

By the way, the scratch is on the holder.

cladking

There are no hordes. This is not to say that no one has a significant accumulation of
them, but it would have been improbable that anyone could have accumulated a sig-
nificant proportion of the mintage without leaving evidence of his activity. I used to
check any bunch of these I could get my hands on and always asked the owner if any-
one else had ever expressed any interest in his sets. It was about 1981 before there
was a positive response. It was a well known dealer interested in half dollars. All of
these people whom I've encountered over the years are still active.

The coins are not rare however. Compared to the earlier and later proofs they are much
less common and since there are no proof sets for these years there is more demand from
collectors who desire "proof" coins from these dates. There are still very few collectors
for these simply because they are clad. Sure the half is silver clad, but to most this is little
better. The cent is rarest. It is nearly impossible even with light frosting. Many of these
cent dies probably weren't etched to strike the frosted coins and it wore off very quickly
on the cent for some reason. The nickel isn't too tough with light frosting but is nearly as
scarce as the cent with heavy frosting. Dimes are the next most common. They tend to be
much more common than the cent or nickel, though the '65 can be elusive. The half is far
more common than the dime. It's probably about 5% of '65 mintage and ranges up to near
10% of 1967. The quarter is the most commom especially in the '67 set. The '65 quarter
though tends to have unattractive die polishing in the fields near the rim. Attractive 1965's
without polishing are much tougher.

There are three distinctly different kinds of the SMS coins. And there are several which are
mixtures of the three types. Only one of these types appear as frosted coins.

LucyBop

I have now begun to check for cameos in the sms sets, I believe that there are some treasures to be found...

solid

Well, now that you bring it up...

...since I do have this auction running right now, I could say that
the coins are vastly undervalued, and that the sky is the limit when it comes to future
potential, but that would lean towards hype, wouldn't it?

I do like these coins, particularly when the mirrors are as deep and clear as the example
in the provided link. Combine that with some nice frost and you've got a great coin!

Ken

P.S. Since I ended up using this thread as blatant advertising, interested board members
can deduct 10% off the winning bid! Fair enough?

keets

in true cameo the half dollars and nickels seem to be easiest to locate but none are common, especially in deep cameo. the cents, as cladking said, are almost non-existent. for my money they are a good area to collect in but the trick is finding coins with clear fields AND nice cameo. it seems there are still sets that haven't been searched because i find at least moderately frosted coins routinely. but as for hoards i'd doubt it. maybe there are some surprises held by collectors who purchesed from the mint and stored the stuff away, but they get searched as soon as they surface. the trick is to get the word out that you want them and hopefully you get to the head of the line!!

al h.

oldcameoproofsguy

<< <i>The cent is rarest. It is nearly impossible even with light frosting. >>


Cladking, I absolutely agree. I have a 1967 PCGS MS65 CAM example which is one of the more heavily cameoed pieces and it wasn't easy to come by. If any of the denominations is truely difficult it is the cent.

I see the halfs heating up a lot lately but it seems like the minors are really being ignored. Do you think that very heavy DCAM minors represent a good value right now?

keets

oldcam

without a doubt as far as the cents and nickels. i don't see the pops growing much at all in DCAM for the nickels and in CAM of any degree for the cents. any 1965 coins with good cameo are worth a shot if the mirrors aren't too impaired.

al h.

cladking

It depends on what you have to pay for them. They are a far better value than CDN bid,
but if you have to pay enormous premiums then it depends on where the coins' prices
are going in the future. From the prices that I've seen for the minors they don't necessarily
seem to be too high. Really one has to compare the prices to other coins which are similar.
Ask yourself "if a coin is really worth X amount than shouldn't this similar coin be worth a
about the same?" On this basis it would seem that some might be a little more fully priced than
others.

There were about two million of each of these sets made and there are enough gems that
none other than the cents are rare, but there has been high attrition on all of these coins
and the depth of the available supply is far more shallow than most assume.

oldcameoproofsguy

Keets,

You are right about the mirrors on 1965 coinage. I think that for that year with all denominations it was a combination of poor planchet preparation and poor die preparation. I do have a 1965 SMS nickel that does have surprisingly nice mirrors for this year though so I know they can be found.

TheNumish

What did the grading services give to the 3 coins you have pictured? The 1965 nickel certainly looks better than the one I asked about the other day.

Gilbert

"There are three distinctly different kinds of the SMS coins. And there are several which are
mixtures of the three types. Only one of these types appear as frosted coins. "

Please expound? Are you talking between 1965, 1966and 1967? Or '60s SMS, versus the "82 -'83 souvenir sets? I don't understand completely.

Cam40

Lets make a contest out of it.

I guess SP `semi-proof`DCAM68 Washington and 67DCAM on the Roosie and Jeff.

Did I win?

DHeath

For those who are interested, there is a great article about their production in the library across the street. Apparently, the 65 coins were single strike coins on unpolished planchets. All of the 65 coins were minted in just a few months in 1966. For the 1966 coinage, the process changed, and the coins became more proof-like. The planchets were polished. In 1967, the coins became essentially modern proofs, and were manufactured in the same way, using superior dies, more pressure, and well prepared planchets. Of all these coins, the 65's are by far the toughest.

I am a sucker for these coins, and always love seeing 1965 cams with nice mirrors. The dcam population for 1965 is very thin. The 65 set came from the mint in pliofilm, but the 66 and 67 sets were shipped in hard plastic holders. OldCameoProofGuy, since rarity was part of the original question, it is also important to mention the 12 known 1964 SMS sets. The last time I checked, the Kennedy half could be had for a little more than $10,000. According to the membership here, all 12 of the halves have been encapsulated. The other coins aren't rare, just rare by modern standards. Anyone hoping to assemble a dcam set of modern proofs must cross this hurdle, and it takes more effort than most.

1965 SMS set w/cameo

Link to Treasury Dept Article about production dates

oldcameoproofsguy

The coins pictured grade as follows:
1966 PCGS MS66CAM 25c
1967 PCGS MS67CAM 10c
1965 PCGS MS67CAM 5c

DHeath,

The 1964 SMS is tough! I noticed a 1964 MS65 SMS cent went for $5000 in auction not too long ago. That is probably a pretty good price considering its rarity. I also have looked at pop reports and have not seen any CAM examples for this year; correct me if I'm wrong here.

Numish,

I think that the nickels would look really close in person. When I saw the photo you posted the other day I thought "Hey, there's my coin."

CarlWohlforth

I've been looking for cameo SMS nickels. For how hard they are to find in high grades they seem cheap to me. I was thinking Jeffersons are just not as popular as Kennedy Halfs!

MS collectors can say they don't need SMS coins because they are proofs.

Proof collectors can say they don't need SMS coins because they are MS.

Anyway I'm trying to get a few of these and now will keep my eye out for the cents as well as the nickels.

DHeath

I'm unaware of any, but I'd sure love to see one. Wouldn't it be fun to try to distinguish a 64 Cam SMS Lincoln from a 64 Pr Cam Lincoln.

cladking

These sets were made over a short period from late '65 to mid '67. In early '65
the mint had announced there would be no mint or proof sets for that year. There
was tremendous demand for these sets from collectors who had purchased sets
continuously for many years. Later the mint did announce the sale of the SMS coins.
It appears that these coins were "rushed" into production after much experimentation
with various minting and handling techniques. Many different types of the SMS coins
exist. The most common type is much like a proof die. It was etched with acid to
create the frosted devices and was struck one time on a regular planchet under added
pressure. Coins were then handled much like regular mint set coins. They do tend to
have a little less marking than other coins of the era so perhaps some additional steps
were taken.

At some point regular production dies were highly polished. These were used to strike
polished planchets. The resultant coins are atrotious. They account for a small percentage
of production. Most appear markfree.

Some of the regular SMS dies recieved different treatment before use.

There are various hybrids of all these types.

keets

the more i discover about the state of the U.S. Mint during this brief period the more it sounds like the place i work at!! don, that is a sweet set. as tempting as it may be to break and submit, you should hold it intact.

al h.

Russ

HMM...it seems that the half isn't represented yet.



I love the 1964 thru 1970 period. It was one of the major transitions in US coinage and was born of the panic of a bunch of short-sighted politicians, and it came on the heels of one of our country's greatest tragedies. The mint had to react hastily and with little planning. That haste and lack of planning makes for some interesting history and coins.

Russ, NCNE

NIckelCollector

I agree with Carl the nickels in DCAM are very difficult to locate and are relatively cheap given their pop numbers.

Anybody have a 1966 MS67DCAM Jefferson for sale?

Frank

keets

now frank, how do you expect me to crack the top 20 if you keep soliciting all the nice coins?!?!?!?!? the jefferson's in DCAM are indeed tough to locate, especially if you look at the registry pops vs. PCGS pops-----it makes a difficult task even harder. when they do show up the anxious hours of watching are just too much for me. i was beaten at the wire by so many about a year or two ago that i gave up the chase.

al h.