Proofs: Minimum desirable grade? Best value?
dan1ecu
Posts: 1,573
I don’t own any PR60 or PR61 coins, although I imagine they don’t have much in terms of eye appeal. It might be better to own an AU55 or AU58...
What I’ve noticed with coins graded as PR64 is that many of them have nice surfaces, but there’s something else that’s undesirable (like a hazy film from dipping, or spots). Again, a nice business strike might be a better deal.
Proof 65's are nice from what I’ve seen. I guess by definition, they should be nice. In many series, that’s where the big jump in price is. I guess that PR65 is my minimum desirable grade.
PR66 and above tend to be expensive. If there’s just a small tic or barely-noticeable contact mark between a nice PR65 and little bit nicer PR66, then I think that the PR65 might represent the best value.
I guess it varies from series to series. What’s your experience with proof coins in your favorite series? What grade represents the best value?
What I’ve noticed with coins graded as PR64 is that many of them have nice surfaces, but there’s something else that’s undesirable (like a hazy film from dipping, or spots). Again, a nice business strike might be a better deal.
Proof 65's are nice from what I’ve seen. I guess by definition, they should be nice. In many series, that’s where the big jump in price is. I guess that PR65 is my minimum desirable grade.
PR66 and above tend to be expensive. If there’s just a small tic or barely-noticeable contact mark between a nice PR65 and little bit nicer PR66, then I think that the PR65 might represent the best value.
I guess it varies from series to series. What’s your experience with proof coins in your favorite series? What grade represents the best value?
0
Comments
That said, the standards on the grades of proofs remind me of sophistry a bit. As long as there is no obvious hairlining it's OK. At the grading class in Charlotte the guy next to me had several proof trade dollars. Mintages < 1000. The coins were OK but hairlined to death and were PR61 and 62. Too distracting for me to appreciate. Then I have an accented hair JFK PR62 that Marty sent me that I can't easily see why it is 62.
Neil
· For very modern coins, I'd say that anything that is less than PR-66 or 67 (if there is very much in slabs in those lower grades) are probably not worthwhile. These coins, especially in recent years have been very well made, and anything but what old time collectors called “Gem Quality” really doesn’t make much sense.
· Going back to the early 1950s, probably PR-65 or better would be in line for many collectors. PR-64 and 63 is what one often finds Proof sets of this era. Proof singles are almost always better to much better.
· For the 1930s and early ‘40s, I’ve seen selective PR-64 coins that were OK. If you are looking for scarce items like the 1936 Proof coins, perhaps a select PR-63 would be OK in the silver series if that is your budget limit. Low grade Proof copper coins and often times the nickel coins are often made quite unsightly because of black spots and perhaps marks.
· I’ve seen some acceptable PR-63 Barber coins, but by in large most collectors are looking for PR-64 and 65 coins. The same can be said for Proof back to the Civil War era.
· The mint started to issue complete Proof sets on a regular basis in 1858. Proof coins from the late 1850s and early 1860s are certainly acceptable in PR-63, but eye appeal is very important here. Ugly “technical grade” coins are not easy to sell.
· Pre 1858 Proofs are very scarce to rare for the most part and are not often encountered. It really depends upon what you can find and how many hairlines and other defects you can tolerate. Today I say an 1854 with arrows quarter in PR-62. The coin was not pretty, but it was interesting and it certainly is rare.
I don't know what causes haze, but it's not dipping.
Tom
There is a little more leeway on the Ikes. This applies primarily to the post 1970 issues.
Most of the coins in proof sets will meet this standard if not damaged in some way.
<< <i>Then I have an accented hair JFK PR62 that Marty sent me that I can't easily see why it is 62. >>
This one is a PR64:
PCGS really, really, really, really hates hairlines.
Russ, NCNE
I can really understand why PCGS does get tough on hairlines on modern Proof coins. Hairlines are an indicator of improper cleaning or mishandling. Given that fact that many of these coins have spent a large portion of their existence in government holders, that sort of thing should be fairly uncommon.
Hairlining is actually pretty common straight out of the packaging on 1964 proof Kennedys, and even more so on the Accented Hair variety.
I'm still trying to knock Marty off as the low grade king with his PR62 Accented Hair.
Russ, NCNE
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when proof dies are constantly polished, especially back in the 60s era and before, the rags used would put hairlines in the dies transferred to the coins- the coins themselves weren't cleaned... hairlines are an indication of cleaning on circulating, not proof, coinage.
Jeremy
<< <i>Bill, aren't hairlines caused not by improper handling/cleaning but polishing of dies? >>
Jeremy,
Die polish lines and hairlining are two different things. Die polish lines are considered "as minted"; hairlines are considered damage. There are a variety of things that can cause harlines, cleaning is only one. In the case of the 1964 proof Kennedys, hairlining is most often caused by mishandling either at the mint during processing, or getting banged around during movement over the years.
Die polish lines will appears as "ridges", hairlines as "grooves".
Russ, NCNE
Val Webb in his cameo Proof book wrote about die polishing and re-polishing some years ago. Cameo Proof coins can result from the use of brand new dies, usually only the first 10 or so impressions. Cameo Proof coins can also result when in-service dies are removed, repolished and put back in service. These cameo coins might not be that attractive, however because they can have raised die polishing lines that impair the appearance.
A high end PR66 is a really great bargain; my 1915 PR66 Barber quarter looks like a 67 but I only paid 66 money for it. I wish that I could find more like it.
the comments have to do with pre 1916 proof coins and 36 to 42 coins of course there are always exceptions to the rule to the comments below
for me pre 1916 proof coins and 1936 to 42 proof coins that are 64 and above are the way to go as usually below 64 the coins usually USUALLY are hairlines or all banged up
i do not like most proof 64 coins as they are usually too many patches of hairlines or just do not have the eye appeal but there are some excpetions to the rules and there are some really very nice 64 coins that are close to 65;s in 64 holders with great eye appeal then they are really great value coins to buy!i guess it has to have the overall look of a super eye appealling coin
usually but not always 65 66 67 coins are good coins if the look and the eye appeal are there
to be a real 67 coin the proof coin has to be like all hairline free and you usually see this with exceptionslly toned proof 67 coins the dipped monster white 67 coins have hiarlines and for the most part are overgraded coins because the coin have hairlines but they are so well hidden many just cant see them or the sharpies can see the hairlines under a pinpoint haligon but most just simply cant see this and they buy these proof 67 coins that are hassibly hairlined
hairlines are like the easiest thing to see on brilliant blast white proofs but for some reason many just cant see this as the coin has to be tilted in the right light sourse and you have to know what to look for most just cant see this or many just miss it examining a coin fast while looking thruogh auction lot viewing and many times even experienced dealers get screwed all the time by these coins
68 coins are usually really super high end 67 coins but have some exceptional look to them that the grading services reconizes but half are real 68 coins the other half are just nice 67 coins in 68 holders
sincerely michael