Home U.S. Coin Forum

The true DCAM rarieties among 1950-59 proof coinage

As I am wont to do, I completed another little research project today since I was curious about the numbers/rarity of individual dates among 1950-1959 proof coinage. The results (counting DCAMs in all grades):

Total number of PCGS DCAMs graded per series (1950-59)

1.
Franklin half dollar -- 1,075
2. Washington quarter -- 490
3. Lincoln cent -- 294
4. Roosevelt dime -- 201
5. Jefferson nickel -- 88

Single-digit DCAM date populations, all grades (1950-59)
(
if a coin is not listed, 10 or more examples exist in DCAM)

1951 Lincoln 1c...............................1
1952 Roosevelt 10c..........................1
1953 Roosevelt 10c..........................1
1953 Jefferson 5c.............................2
1957 Jefferson 5c.............................3
1958 Jefferson 5c.............................3
1951 Roosevelt 10c..........................3
1954 Roosevelt 10c..........................3
1952 Lincoln 1c...............................4
1950 Franklin 50c............................4
1951 Jefferson 5c.............................6
1952 Jefferson 5c.............................7
1950 Washington 25c.......................7
1951 Washington 25c.......................7
1952 Washington 25c.......................8

Interesting only one Franklin makes the list, although it could be argued this series is the most submitted/resubmitted. Many Jeffs and Roosies are DCAM rarieties, but do not seem to command much respect caught between the cent and the larger quarter and half ...

Comments

  • LucyBopLucyBop Posts: 14,004 ✭✭✭
    I 'll tell you this, a 59 Frankie in DCAM is extremely tough and scarce.
    imageBe Bop A Lula!!
    "Senorita HepKitty"
    "I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭
    RGL,

    I feel better now. I've been crunching numbers on 1960's proofs today and I was thinking I must be a weirdo.image

    Russ, NCNE
  • RGLRGL Posts: 3,784
    Lucy: I am not suggesting there are not a great many scarce DCAMs among '50s proofs; I only listed the single-digit pops... there are 12 Frankies in DCAM for 1959; there also are a dozen 1950 Roosies in DCAMs, as well as a dozen 1954 Jeffs.
  • RGLRGL Posts: 3,784
    It was crunching numbers or a nap ... at least I put the post-dinner time to keeping my mind active.
  • FC57CoinsFC57Coins Posts: 9,140


    << <i>I've been crunching numbers on 1960's proofs today and I was thinking I must be a weirdo. >>



    Let's face it Russ - you ARE a weirdo - but we still like ya! image









    *(You set yourself up beautifully! image)
  • DCAMFranklinDCAMFranklin Posts: 2,862 ✭✭
    Counting only Gem DCAMs, the 1950 Franklin is a Pop. 1 and the 1952 is a Pop. 7 and the 1956, Type1 is a Pop. 3.
  • Well after looking every where for them, the nickel numbers do not suprise me one bit.
    Steve
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭
    Frank,

    Say thank you.image

    Russ, NCNE
  • feel better now. I've been crunching numbers on 1960's proofs today and I was thinking I must be a weirdo.
    Russ, are you planning on sharing your findings?.......Ken
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭
    Still crunching, Ken. I'm very slow on the keyboard, not like this young pup RGL.image I have the 1964 halves done so far. For some reason, I decided to start there.image

    Russ, NCNE
  • I have the 1964 halves done so far. For some reason, I decided to start there....I can't understand why you would do that....Kenimage
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,307 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Very interesting! The most surprising thing is that there are
    as many Lincolns as there are.
    Tempus fugit.
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Counting only Gem DCAMs, the 1950 Franklin is a Pop. 1 and the 1952 is a Pop. 7 and the 1956, Type1 is a Pop. 3.

    hey DCAM

    that's hardly fair!! why not consider that in true, true gem quality RGL's list might be half as long as it is???

    i think the list is fairly representative of the post-strike problems the coins suffered through with the box sets in the early 50's and flat packs thereafter. time takes it's toll. i'm surprised that there are less dimes than those listed. with small fields and a small coin to begin with i would have expected more. and while we're at it, when and who made that second 1953 Jefferson??

    al h.image
  • mnmcoinmnmcoin Posts: 2,165


    << <i>and while we're at it, when and who made that second 1953 Jefferson?? >>



    image

    morris <><
    "Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand."
    ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
    Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.

    ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
    28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
    TEMECULA, CA 92590
    (951) 757-0334

    www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
  • mnmcoinmnmcoin Posts: 2,165
    While Jefferson are extremely tough in DCAM, I have to say the numbers are so low in that area because PCGS is just way to tough on their standards. It seems as if they expect that a Jefferson will have the same contrast and heavy white frost as that of it's silver counterparts, and the fact is, that it just doesn't, specially on the 50s material. Of the 5 or 6 50s dated DCAM Jeffs that I have made, sure they stand out when you compare them to other cam and nocam Jeffs, but put them up against any Roosies, Washingtons and Frankies, and there is just no comparison.

    morris <><
    "Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand."
    ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
    Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.

    ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
    28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
    TEMECULA, CA 92590
    (951) 757-0334

    www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TTT.

    Thought I would resurrect this thread also so that it can join the one by Keets that I also resurrected.

    Any updated population information showing changes in the quoted populations since RGL originally posted this thread would be welcome.
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TTT again.

    Calling RGL.

    Geez, I would have thought that a few new replies would have been posted by now. Everyone must be distracted playing with their new 2005 Satin Mint Sets.
  • RGLRGL Posts: 3,784
    I was preparing to fulfill your request, but only to discover I am now a non-entity. My Collectors Club membership apparently has expired, while I was mulling my many excellent choices for renewal, and I am unable to access the pops ... what to do ...
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    RGL, renew your membership or impose upon a current member to get the information for you. Of course when you post updated results you would have to acknowledge your research assistant. If you can obtain the information and post updated numbers it would be very informative and enlightening. Thanks again. SanctionII.
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TTT.

    RGL, any luck yet in accessing the data to do an update?
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    same for me as for Randy, i allowed my membership to lapse and won't be renewing until sometime in July. the last current pop numbers i'm aware of are from a quarterly hard copy report from March 2004.

    during the past year i've only seen/heard of perhaps three 50's DCAM Jefferson Nickels and i believe two of them were scooped up by Badger?? or another forum member.
  • pf70collectorpf70collector Posts: 6,503 ✭✭✭
    PCGS No Date Den Variety Desig VG-VF 40 45 50 53 55 58 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Total
    4182 1950 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 48 246 431 227 17 0 0 971
    84182       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 56 30 0 0 0 104
    94182       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 6 0 0 0 14
    4183 1951 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 28 180 451 222 13 0 0 897
    84183       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 15 77 57 4 0 0 158
    94183       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 7
    4184 1952 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 21 145 424 341 34 0 0 967
    84184       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 47 83 11 0 0 146
    94184       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 0 0 0 10
    4185 1953 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 16 108 347 413 81 1 0 967
    84185       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 28 77 23 0 0 132
    94185       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3
    PCGS No Date Den Variety Desig VG-VF 40 45 50 53 55 58 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Total
    4186 1954 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 26 132 246 455 165 6 0 1032
    84186       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 41 113 55 4 0 220
    94186       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 4 0 0 12
    4187 1955 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 17 101 243 416 154 4 0 936
    84187       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 47 193 69 0 0 320
    94187       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 24 11 0 0 41
    4188 1956 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 30 101 218 82 4 0 444
    84188       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 35 85 28 2 0 155
    94188       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 3 0 0 12
    4189 1957 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 41 172 302 78 1 0 609
    84189       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14 47 15 0 0 78
    94189       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3
    4190 1958 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 18 81 213 36 5 0 361
    84190       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 20 86 35 0 0 144
    94190       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 4
    4191 1959 5C   PR 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 11 27 117 200 27 2 0 386
    84191       PRCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 38 118 40 2 0 204
    94191       PRDC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 8 1 0 20

    as of 6.16.05



  • JRoccoJRocco Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Wow some of these in DCAM are truly rare.
    Some coins are just plain "Interesting"
  • 57 Proof cams aint that easy either !

    You can hunt a long time and when ya find THE ONE,you better have the wallet to match !
    image
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    RGL, I liked this post way back in 03. image There are coins later date than 59 that are surprisingly tough. There is only a single 66 SMS Lincoln graded Dcam. There are plenty of toughies for those that do their homework.
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Thought I would send this thread to the top.

    On the Set Registry Forum today RGL posted and indicated that he is back.

    Great to see him back again.

    So how about he give an update to this April, 2003 thread with current pops?

    Welcome back RGL.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file