FB Roosevelts. Rare dates?

Bruggs · August 30, 2003 11:00AM

Have enough Roosevelts been (re)submitted during the "FB" era for determining what dates are going to be rare?(or scarce) Or will it take a few years to establish true numbers to determine this. How about Roosevelt collector's, let me hear your thoughts.

Bruggs

cladking · August 30, 2003 11:07AM

The rare silvers are beginning to emerge. This is not true for the clads.
It's safe to predict that they aren't mostly more rare than the silvers, they
are simply not being submitted in the numbers that the silver issues are.
There will be some tough clads, but just don't draw too many conclusions
at the current time.

Louis · August 30, 2003 11:08AM

I can't answer your question, but I am getting REAL close to completeing a complete unc. roll set of the silver roosies and hope to make some impact on the pops soon.

sinin1 · August 30, 2003 12:50PM

was checking pops on some I had

1959-D has 36 67's and 129 FB

a couple with low numbers now (hard?) are 1957 and 1961 with only 8 FB certified

atarian · August 30, 2003 1:27PM

thinking about this i can see 68d 69 69d 78d are going to be harder to find. at least ive noticed they are hard to locate. those i think will be so far the only hard ones toget. unless for some forseeable reason the mint really cuts back on production

jay

FC57Coins · August 30, 2003 1:57PM

I think it's still way too early to tell and way too early to jump to conclusions - here's the list of dates and mint marks by population of FB's as it stands today:

1950-D 183
1959-D 129
1959 128
1946-S 114
1954-D 104
1953-D 84
1955-D 81
1958-D 73
1946-D 72
1962-D 67
1949-D 66
1952-D 61
1948-D 60
1962 54
1946 49
1954 46
1951 45
1948-S 43
1951-D 42
1947-D 34
1947-S 34
1951-S 32
1960-D 32
1964-D 32
1952 31
1964 28
1952-S 28
1948 27
1960 27
1954-S 26
1957-D 25
1961-D 24
1956-D 23
1947 22
1950 22
1950-S 21
1953-S 18
1955 16
1953 15
1949 13
1956 10
1949-S 10
1963-D 10
1957 8
1961 8
1955-S 8
1963 7
1958 5

FC57Coins · August 30, 2003 2:17PM

An interesting sidebar - I just did the same breakdown of dates in the NGC Full Torch and there are noticeably less full torches than there are full bands - makes you wonder if it's because less coins are being sent to NGC (I don't think this to be the case) or because they are being tougher at grading Full Torchies (this might be it).

1950 D 31
1948 22
1946 S 19
1948 S 18
1964 D 14
1946 D 10
1951 D 10
1962 9
1953 D 9
1955 D 9
1959 D 9
1952 8
1947 S 7
1952 D 7
1952 S 7
1957 D 7
1951 6
1964 6
1948 D 6
1950 S 6
1955 S 6
1958 D 6
1946 5
1957 5
1959 5
1949 D 5
1954 D 5
1961 D 5
1962 D 5
1950 4
1947 D 4
1951 S 4
1953 S 4
1954 S 4
1956 D 3
1960 D 3
1954 2
1947 1
1949 1
1953 1
1955 1
1960 1
1961 1
1963 1
1949 S 1
1963 D 1

clackamas · October 23, 2003 2:51PM

Revive this thread to get opinions a little later on in the life span of the FT Roosie. Are the 1963's that hard? P and D? Honestly I don't know I am a novice roosevelt collector. The 55-S seems to be a tough date for me. Are the POPs now an accurate indication of how hard some dates are to find? Have People been going through rolls like crazy? Seems as though quite a few 68's have been made this last year.

onlyroosies · October 23, 2003 4:06PM

I have yet to see one MS68FB Roosie hit the open Market.

coppercoins · October 23, 2003 5:11PM

I never thought I would hear the words "roosevelt dime" and "rare" meet each other in the same sentence.

MadMarty · October 23, 2003 9:07PM

<< <i>I have yet to see one MS68FB Roosie hit the open Market. >>

That's because you have them all!!!

Blackhawk · October 24, 2003 6:04AM

I don't think that there's any question that NGC criteria for FT is tougher than PCGS for FB. Someone with a bunch of PCGS FB coins could do a test though and randomly grab a bunch (no picking the coins out of the group that look like they have full torch lines) and send them into NGC. I'd be interested in the results of this test, and would pay for one submission if we could get one of the dime guys to send 10 PCGS FB graded coins in to NGC. Anyone else volunteer to pay for a submission? If we could get 10 people to pay for 1 submission each, this would be a great way to find out just where the "bear %#@$ in the buckwheat" so to speak.

mgoodm3 · October 24, 2003 6:29AM

So, as I understand it, there are two different monikers being applied to Roosevelts? FB and FT, depending on the service. That's crazy, and if we're not already confused, we are now.

clackamas · October 24, 2003 6:36AM

>>So, as I understand it, there are two different monikers being applied to Roosevelts? FB and FT, depending on the service. That's crazy, and if we're not already confused, we are now.

I don't think its crazy as long as one is a sub set of the other. A FT will always be a FB.

mgoodm3 · October 24, 2003 6:41AM

If there is a price differential, people will undoubtably pay FT prices for FB coins. Seems ripe for abuse.

onlyroosies · October 24, 2003 7:13AM

In the beginning PCGS was a little lax on giving the FB and NGC was extremely tough giving the FT. I noticed
since the last long beach show NGC has loosened there standards for FT and PCGS has tightened up theres
for FB. I think there about equal now. I'm now getting the FT on NGC coins that were sent in twice
before and didn't get it. NGC has lost a lot of there high end coins to PCGS as crossovers. NGC is still a 1/2
to 1/3 of a point looser on the grade for Roosies. The price difference between an NGC FT compaired to a
PCGS FB of the same grade is HUGE. In some cases the difference is 500%+ for the same grade. Thats why
NGC is loosing all there MS67.80 coins to PCGS as MS67.10. Now the coin is worth multiples of what it was
worth in the NGC holder.

Onlyroosies

onlyroosies · October 24, 2003 8:08AM

I ran the pops from todays pop report and compaired it to Franks that he ran almost two months ago.
Some date are beginning to show there colors. The only date with no increase in the pops was the 1963-D

8/30/03 ..... ..... 10/24/03

1950-D 183 ... 1950-D 231
1959-D 129 ... 1946-S 181
1959 128 ....... 1959-D 175
1946-S 114 .... 1959 144
1954-D 104 ... 1962 119
1953-D 84 ..... 1954-D 116
1955-D 81 ..... 1953-D 108
1958-D 73 ..... 1955-D 95
1946-D 72 ..... 1946-D 93
1962-D 67 ..... 1948-D 80
1949-D 66 ..... 1962-D 80
1952-D 61 ..... 1958-D 78
1948-D 60 ..... 1949-D 76
1962 54 ......... 1952-D 67
1946 49 ......... 1946 66
1954 46 ......... 1951 62
1951 45 ......... 1951-D 53
1948-S 43 ..... 1954 51
1951-D 42 ..... 1948-S 48
1947-D 34 ..... 1964-D 44
1947-S 34 ..... 1960-D 43
1951-S 32 ..... 1957-D 38
1960-D 32 ..... 1948 37
1964-D 32 ..... 1947-D 37
1952 31 ......... 1951-S 36
1964 28 ......... 1947-S 35
1952-S 28 ..... 1960 33
1948 27 ......... 1964 32
1960 27 ......... 1952 32
1954-S 26 ..... 1952-S 30
1957-D 25 ..... 1956-D 29
1961-D 24 ..... 1961-D 29
1956-D 23 ..... 1954-S 28
1947 22 ......... 1950-S 27
1950 22 ......... 1947 25
1950-S 21 ..... 1950 25
1953-S 18 ..... 1953-S 25
1955 16 ......... 1961 24
1953 15 ......... 1955-S 23
1949 13 ......... 1955 20
1956 10 ......... 1953 19
1949-S 10 ..... 1949 17
1963-D 10 ..... 1956 14
1957 8 ........... 1957 14
1961 8 ........... 1949-S 12
1955-S 8 ........ 1958 12
1963 7 ........... 1963-D 10
1958 5 ........... 1963 9

FB Roosevelts. Rare dates?

Comments

Leave a Comment